Speech Perception Deficits in Mandarin-Speaking School-Aged Children with Poor Reading Comprehension.

Huei-Mei Liu, Feng-Ming Tsao
Author Information
  1. Huei-Mei Liu: Department of Special Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
  2. Feng-Ming Tsao: Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that children learning alphabetic writing systems who have language impairment or dyslexia exhibit speech perception deficits. However, whether such deficits exist in children learning logographic writing systems who have poor reading comprehension remains uncertain. To further explore this issue, the present study examined speech perception deficits in Mandarin-speaking children with poor reading comprehension. Two self-designed tasks, consonant categorical perception task and lexical tone discrimination task were used to compare speech perception performance in children ( = 31, age range = 7;4-10;2) with poor reading comprehension and an age-matched typically developing group ( = 31, age range = 7;7-9;10). Results showed that the children with poor reading comprehension were less accurate in consonant and lexical tone discrimination tasks and perceived speech contrasts less categorically than the matched group. The correlations between speech perception skills (i.e., consonant and lexical tone discrimination sensitivities and slope of consonant identification curve) and individuals' oral language and reading comprehension were stronger than the correlations between speech perception ability and word recognition ability. In conclusion, the results revealed that Mandarin-speaking children with poor reading comprehension exhibit less-categorized speech perception, suggesting that imprecise speech perception, especially lexical tone perception, is essential to account for reading learning difficulties in Mandarin-speaking children.

Keywords

References

  1. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Aug;118(2):1072-88 [PMID: 16158662]
  2. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2009 Dec;52(6):1493-509 [PMID: 19951926]
  3. Brain. 2007 Nov;130(Pt 11):2915-28 [PMID: 17921181]
  4. Int J Audiol. 2009;48(10):708-17 [PMID: 19863356]
  5. Can J Psychol. 1987 Mar;41(1):48-61 [PMID: 3502888]
  6. Brain Lang. 2004 Apr;89(1):21-6 [PMID: 15010233]
  7. Br J Educ Psychol. 2006 Dec;76(Pt 4):683-96 [PMID: 17094880]
  8. Child Dev. 2018 Sep;89(5):1821-1838 [PMID: 28605008]
  9. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001 Apr;44(2):384-99 [PMID: 11324660]
  10. Otol Neurotol. 2010 Oct;31(8):1248-53 [PMID: 20818292]
  11. J Exp Child Psychol. 2011 Nov;110(3):362-72 [PMID: 21663919]
  12. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005 Aug;48(4):944-59 [PMID: 16378484]
  13. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002 Apr;45(2):231-42 [PMID: 12003507]
  14. J Educ Psychol. 2012 Feb;104(1): [PMID: 24273341]
  15. J Exp Child Psychol. 1997 Feb;64(2):199-231 [PMID: 9120381]
  16. J Psycholinguist Res. 2010 Dec;39(6):465-84 [PMID: 20033848]
  17. Child Dev. 2009 Mar-Apr;80(2):593-605 [PMID: 19467013]
  18. Child Dev. 2004 Jul-Aug;75(4):1067-84 [PMID: 15260865]
  19. J Res Read. 2013 May;36(2):172-185 [PMID: 25620819]
  20. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Aug;55(4):1053-67 [PMID: 22232409]
  21. Psychol Sci. 2010 Aug;21(8):1106-16 [PMID: 20585051]
  22. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005 Oct;48(5):1065-79 [PMID: 16411796]
  23. J Speech Hear Res. 1993 Dec;36(6):1286-99 [PMID: 8114495]
  24. J Exp Psychol. 1957 Nov;54(5):358-68 [PMID: 13481283]
  25. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998 Feb;51(1):153-77 [PMID: 9532966]
  26. J Exp Child Psychol. 2000 Sep;77(1):30-60 [PMID: 10964458]
  27. J Exp Child Psychol. 2004 Apr;87(4):336-61 [PMID: 15050458]
  28. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2000 Jul;41(5):587-600 [PMID: 10946751]
  29. J Exp Child Psychol. 2004 Jun;88(2):152-70 [PMID: 15157756]
  30. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016 Dec 1;59(6):1448-1460 [PMID: 27942706]
  31. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Sep 27;102(39):14110-5 [PMID: 16162673]
  32. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004 Jan;45(1):2-40 [PMID: 14959801]
  33. Dev Psychol. 2002 Nov;38(6):934-47 [PMID: 12428705]
  34. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2010 Sep;51(9):1031-9 [PMID: 20456536]
  35. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005 Aug;48(4):805-16 [PMID: 16378475]
  36. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2012 Aug;53(8):874-82 [PMID: 22489956]
  37. Dev Sci. 2009 Sep;12(5):753-67 [PMID: 19702768]
  38. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2006 Apr;49(2):278-93 [PMID: 16671844]
  39. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007 Feb;50(1):41-57 [PMID: 17344547]
  40. J Exp Child Psychol. 2008 Oct;101(2):137-55 [PMID: 18462745]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0perceptionspeechchildrenreadingcomprehensionpoorlexicaltoneMandarin-speakingconsonant=learningdeficitsdiscriminationwritingsystemslanguageexhibittaskscategoricaltask31agerange7grouplesscorrelationsabilityPreviousstudiesshownalphabeticimpairmentdyslexiaHoweverwhetherexistlogographicremainsuncertainexploreissuepresentstudyexaminedTwoself-designedusedcompareperformance4-102age-matchedtypicallydeveloping7-910Resultsshowedaccurateperceivedcontrastscategoricallymatchedskillsiesensitivitiesslopeidentificationcurveindividuals'oralstrongerwordrecognitionconclusionresultsrevealedless-categorizedsuggestingimpreciseespeciallyessentialaccountdifficultiesSpeechPerceptionDeficitsMandarin-SpeakingSchool-AgedChildrenPoorReadingComprehension

Similar Articles

Cited By