Refining Stimulus Parameters in Assessing Infant Speech Perception Using Visual Reinforcement Infant Speech Discrimination: Sensation Level.

Kristin M Uhler, Rosalinda Baca, Emily Dudas, Tammy Fredrickson
Author Information
  1. Kristin M Uhler: University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.
  2. Rosalinda Baca: University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO.
  3. Emily Dudas: University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO.
  4. Tammy Fredrickson: University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Speech perception measures have long been considered an integral piece of the audiological assessment battery. Currently, a prelinguistic, standardized measure of speech perception is missing in the clinical assessment battery for infants and young toddlers. Such a measure would allow systematic assessment of speech perception abilities of infants as well as the potential to investigate the impact early identification of hearing loss and early fitting of amplification have on the auditory pathways.
PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of sensation level (SL) on the ability of infants with normal hearing (NH) to discriminate /a-i/ and /ba-da/ and to determine if performance on the two contrasts are significantly different in predicting the discrimination criterion.
RESEARCH DESIGN: The design was based on a survival analysis model for event occurrence and a repeated measures logistic model for binary outcomes. The outcome for survival analysis was the minimum SL for criterion and the outcome for the logistic regression model was the presence/absence of achieving the criterion. Criterion achievement was designated when an infant's proportion correct score was >0.75 on the discrimination performance task.
STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-two infants with NH sensitivity participated in this study. There were 9 males and 13 females, aged 6-14 mo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Testing took place over two to three sessions. The first session consisted of a hearing test, threshold assessment of the two speech sounds (/a/ and /i/), and if time and attention allowed, visual reinforcement infant speech discrimination (VRISD). The second session consisted of VRISD assessment for the two test contrasts (/a-i/ and /ba-da/). The presentation level started at 50 dBA. If the infant was unable to successfully achieve criterion (>0.75) at 50 dBA, the presentation level was increased to 70 dBA followed by 60 dBA. Data examination included an event analysis, which provided the probability of criterion distribution across SL. The second stage of the analysis was a repeated measures logistic regression where SL and contrast were used to predict the likelihood of speech discrimination criterion.
RESULTS: Infants were able to reach criterion for the /a-i/ contrast at statistically lower SLs when compared to /ba-da/. There were six infants who never reached criterion for /ba-da/ and one never reached criterion for /a-i/. The conditional probability of not reaching criterion by 70 dB SL was 0% for /a-i/ and 21% for /ba-da/. The predictive logistic regression model showed that children were more likely to discriminate the /a-i/ even when controlling for SL.
CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all normal-hearing infants can demonstrate discrimination criterion of a vowel contrast at 60 dB SL, while a level of ≥70 dB SL may be needed to allow all infants to demonstrate discrimination criterion of a difficult consonant contrast.

References

  1. Biometrics. 1986 Mar;42(1):121-30 [PMID: 3719049]
  2. J Acoust Soc Am. 1981 Oct;70(4):955-65 [PMID: 7288042]
  3. J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Jun;34(3):643-50 [PMID: 2072689]
  4. Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9 [PMID: 19565683]
  5. Am J Otol. 1991;12 Suppl:144-50 [PMID: 2069175]
  6. J Speech Hear Res. 1977 Dec;20(4):766-80 [PMID: 604689]
  7. J Am Acad Audiol. 2011 Mar;22(3):129-42 [PMID: 21545766]
  8. Ear Hear. 2008 Aug;29(4):479-91 [PMID: 18469711]
  9. J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Jul;76(1):13-7 [PMID: 6747104]
  10. Stat Med. 1992 Oct-Nov;11(14-15):1825-39 [PMID: 1480876]
  11. J Acoust Soc Am. 1979 Dec;66(6):1668-79 [PMID: 521551]
  12. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2007 Nov;116(11):812-8 [PMID: 18074665]
  13. Am J Audiol. 2014 Sep;23(3):309-25 [PMID: 25036461]
  14. J Speech Hear Res. 1984 Mar;27(1):134-44 [PMID: 6716999]
  15. Otol Neurotol. 2008 Feb;29(2):183-8 [PMID: 18223444]
  16. J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Apr;75(4):1213-8 [PMID: 6725772]
  17. J Speech Hear Disord. 1952 Sep;17(3):321-37 [PMID: 13053556]
  18. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987 Jun;81(6):1928-39 [PMID: 3611513]
  19. Ear Hear. 1999 Apr;20(2):89-103 [PMID: 10229511]
  20. Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Apr 1;147(7):694-703 [PMID: 9554609]
  21. Child Dev. 1981;52(4):1135-45 [PMID: 7318516]
  22. Cochlear Implants Int. 2006 Jun;7(2):92-106 [PMID: 18792377]
  23. J Speech Hear Res. 1984 Dec;27(4):613-22 [PMID: 6521469]
  24. Stat Med. 1998 Jun 15;17(11):1261-91 [PMID: 9670414]

Grants

  1. K23 DC013583/NIDCD NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Acoustic Stimulation
Female
Hearing
Humans
Infant
Male
Phonetics
Photic Stimulation
Reinforcement, Psychology
Sensation
Speech Perception
Visual Perception

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0criterionSLinfants/a-i/discriminationassessmentspeech/ba-da/leveltwoanalysismodellogisticdBAcontrastSpeechperceptionmeasureshearingregressiondBbatterymeasureallowinvestigateimpactearlyNHdiscriminateperformancecontrastssurvivaleventrepeatedoutcome>075sessionconsistedtestinfantVRISDsecondpresentation507060probabilityneverreacheddemonstrateInfantBACKGROUND:longconsideredintegralpieceaudiologicalCurrentlyprelinguisticstandardizedmissingclinicalyoungtoddlerssystematicabilitieswellpotentialidentificationlossfittingamplificationauditorypathwaysPURPOSE:sensationabilitynormaldeterminesignificantlydifferentpredictingRESEARCHDESIGN:designbasedoccurrencebinaryoutcomesminimumpresence/absenceachievingCriterionachievementdesignatedinfant'sproportioncorrectscoretaskSTUDYSAMPLE:Twenty-twosensitivityparticipatedstudy9males13femalesaged6-14moDATACOLLECTIONANDANALYSIS:Testingtookplacethreesessionsfirstthresholdsounds/a//i/timeattentionallowedvisualreinforcementstartedunablesuccessfullyachieveincreasedfollowedDataexaminationincludedprovideddistributionacrossstageusedpredictlikelihoodRESULTS:InfantsablereachstatisticallylowerSLscomparedsixoneconditionalreaching0%21%predictiveshowedchildrenlikelyevencontrollingCONCLUSIONS:Nearlynormal-hearingcanvowel≥70mayneededdifficultconsonantRefiningStimulusParametersAssessingPerceptionUsingVisualReinforcementDiscrimination:SensationLevel

Similar Articles

Cited By