Speaking clearly for children with learning disabilities: Sentence perception in noise

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 80-97

  Bradlow, Ann R ^a   Kraus, Nina ^a   Hayes, Erin ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Children with learning disabilities; Clear speech perception; Clear speech production; Speech intelligibility; Speech perception in noise

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY CORTEX; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING ACUITY; HUMAN; LEARNING DISORDER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PHONETICS; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING; NOISE; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

CHILD; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING DISORDERS; MALE; NOISE; PHONETICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0038201506     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/007)     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Bamford, J., & Wilson, I. (1979). Methodological considerations and practical aspects of the BKB sentence lists. In J. Bench & J. Bamford (Eds.), Speech-hearing tests and the spoken language of hearing-impaired children (pp. 148-187). London: Academic Press.
2. Bench, J., & Bamford, J. (Eds.). (1979). Speech-hearing tests and the spoken language of hearing-impaired children. London: Academic Press.
3. Bradlow, A. R. (2002). Confluent talker- and listener-related forces in clear speech production. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 7 (pp. 241-273). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
4. Bradlow, A. R., Kraus, N., Nicol, T. G., McGee, T. J., Cunningham, J., & Zecker, S. G. (1999). Effects of lengthened formant transition duration on discrimination and neural representation of synthetic CV syllables by normal and learning-disabled children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2086-2096.
5. Chermak, G. D., Vonhof, M. R., & Bendel, R. B. (1989). Word identification performance in the presence of competing speech and noise in learning disabled adults. Ear & Hearing, 10, 90-93.
6. Cunningham, J., Nicol, T. G., Zecker, S. G., Bradlow, A. R., & Kraus, N. (2001). Neurobiologic responses to speech in noise in children with learning problems: Deficits and strategies for improvement. Clinical Neurophysiology, 112, 758-767.
7. Elliot, L. L., Connors, S., Kille, E., Levin, S., Ball, K., & Katz, D. (1979). Children's understanding of monosyllabic nouns in quiet and in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66, 12-21.
8. Elliot, L. L., Hammer, M. A., & Scholl, M. E. (1989). Fine-grained auditory discrimination in normal children and children with language-learning problems. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 112-119.
9. Ellis Weismer, S., & Hesketh, L. J. (1996). Lexical learning by children with specific language impairment: Effects of linguistic input presented at varying speaking rates. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 177-190.
10. Ellis Weismer, S., & Hesketh, L. J. (1998). The impact of emphatic stress on novel word learning by children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1444-1458.
11. Fant, G. (1973). Speech sounds and features. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Farmer, M. E. & Klein, R. M. (1995). The evidence for a temporal processing deficit linked to dyslexia: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 460-493.
13. Ganong, W. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 110-125.
14. Gordon-Salant, S. (1986). Recognition of natural and time/intensity altered CVs by young and elderly subjects with normal hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 1599-1607.
15. Hanks, W. D., & Johnson, G. D. (1998). HINT list equivalency using older listeners. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1335-1340.
16. Hazan, V., & Simpson, A. (1998). The effect of cue-enhancement on the intelligibility of nonsense word and sentence materials presented in noise. Speech Communication, 24, 211-226.
17. Hazan, V., & Simpson, A. (2000). The effect of cue-enhancement on consonant intelligibility in noise: Speaker and listener effects. Language and Speech, 43, 273-294.
18. Johnson, K., Flemming, E., & Wright, R. (1993). The hyperspace effect: Phonetic targets are hyperarticulated. Language, 69, 505-528.
19. Kennedy, E., Levitt, H., Neuman, A. C., & Weiss, M. (1998). Consonant-vowel intensity ratios for maximizing consonant recognition by hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103, 1098-1114.
20. Kenyon, E. L., Leidenheim, S. E., & Zwillenberg, S. (1998). Speech discrimination in the sensorineural hearing loss patients: How is it affected by background noise? Military Medicine, 163, 647-650.
21. Klein, R. M., & Farmer, M. (1995). Dyslexia and a temporal processing deficit: A reply to the commentaries. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2, 515-526.
22. Kraus, N., McGee, T. J., Carrell, T. D., Zecker, S. G., Nicol, T. G., & Koch, D. B. (1996). Auditory neurophysiologic responses and discrimination deficits in children with learning problems. Science, 273, 971-973.
23. Krause, J. C. (2001). Properties of naturally produced clear speech at normal rates and implications for intelligibility enhancement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
24. Martin, R. C. (1995). Heterogeneity of deficits in developmental dyslexia and implications for methodology. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 494-500.
25. Mayo, L. H., Florentine, M., & Buus, S. (1997). Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 40, 686-693.
26. Meador, D., Flege, J. E., & MacKay, I. R. (2000). Factors affecting the recognition of words in a second language. Bilingualism, 3(1), 55-67.
27. Merzenich, M. M., Jenkins, W. M., Johnston, P., Schreiner, C., Miller, S. L., & Tallal, P. (1996). Temporal processing deficits of language-learning impaired children ameliorated by training. Science, 271, 77-81.
28. Miller, G. A., Heise, G. A., & Lichten, W. (1951). The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 329-335.
29. Mody, M., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Brady, S. (1997). Speech perception deficits in poor readers: Auditory processing or phonological coding? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 199-231.
30. Montgomery, A. A., & Edge, R. A. (1988). Evaluation of two speech enhancement techniques to improve intelligibility for hearing-impaired adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 31, 386-393.
31. Moon, S.-J., & Lindblom, B. (1994). Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 40-55.
32. Nábèlek, A. K., & Donahue, A. M. (1984). Perception of consonants in reverberation by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 632-634.
33. O'Neill, J. J. (1957). Recognition of intelligibility test materials in context and isolation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 22(1), 87-90.
34. Payton, K. L., Uchanski, R. M., & Braida, L. D. (1994). Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 1581-1592.
35. Picheny, M. A., Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1985). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing: I. Intelligibility differences between clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 96-103.
36. Picheny, M. A., Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1986). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing: II. Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 434-446.
37. Picheny, M. A., Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1989). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing: III. An attempt to determine the contribution of speaking rate to differences in intelligibility between clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 600-603.
38. Pisoni, D. B. (1997). Perception of synthetic speech. In J. P. H. van Santen, R. W. Sproat, J. P. Olive, & J. Hirschberg (Eds.), Progress in speech synthesis (pp. 541-560). New York: Springer-Verlag,
39. Pisoni, D. B., Nusbaum, H. C., & Greene, B. G. (1985). Perception of synthetic speech generated by rule. Proceedings of the IEEE, 73, 1665-1676.
40. Reed, M. A. (1989). Speech perception and the discrimination of brief auditory cues in reading disabled children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 270-292.
41. Rosen, S., van der Lely, H., & Adlard, A. (2000). No consistent nonspeech auditory deficits in specific language impairment (SLI). Paper presented at the Workshop on The Nature of Speech Perception, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
42. Stark, R. E., & Heinz, J. M. (1996). Perception of stop consonants in children with expressive and receptive-expressive language impairments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 676-686.
43. Stollman, M. H. P., Kapteyn, T. S., & Sleeswijk, B. W. (1994). Effect of time-scaled modification of speech on the speech recognition threshold in noise for hearing-impaired and language-impaired children. Scandinavian Audiology, 23, 39-46.
44. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455-462.
45. Sussman, J. E. (1993). Perception of formant transition cues to place of articulation in children with language impairments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1286-1299.
46. Tallal, P. (1980). Auditory temporal perception, phonics, and reading disabilities in children. Brain and Language, 9, 182-198.
47. Tallal, P., Miller, S. L., Bedi, G., Byma, G., Wang, X., Nagarajan, S. S., Schreiner, C., Jenkins, W. M., & Merzenich, M. M. (1996). Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science, 271, 81-84.
48. Tallal, P., & Piercy, M. (1974). Developmental aphasia: Rate of auditory processing and selective impairment of consonant perception. Neuropsychologia, 12, 83-93.
49. Uchanski, R. M. (1988). Spectral and temporal contributions to speech clarity for hearing impaired listeners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
50. Uchanski, R. M., Choi, S. S., Braida, L. D., Reed, C. M., & Durlach, N. I. (1996). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing: IV. Further studies of the role of speaking rate. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 494-509.
51. Weismer, G., & Martin, R. E. (1992). Acoustic and perceptual approaches to the study of intelligibility. In R. D. Kent (Ed.), Intelligibility in speech disorders: Theory, measurement and management (pp. 67-118). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins.
52. Wilkinson, G. (1993). Wide Range Achievement Test (3rd ed.). Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.
53. Woodcock, R., & Johnson, M. (1977). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery: Tests of Cognitive Ability. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
54. Woodcock, R., & Johnson, M. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery: Tests of Cognitive Ability, Standard and Supplemental Batteries (rev. ed.). Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.