Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25611214›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2015

All cues are not created equal: the case for facilitating the acquisition of typical weighting strategies in children with hearing loss.

Joanna H Lowenstein, Susan Nittrouer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Contributions to Speech-Cue Weighting in Older Adults With Impaired Hearing.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2020
    Article
  2. Neural processing of amplitude and formant rise time in dyslexia.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2016
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Joanna H Lowenstein
Susan Nittrouer

Funding

The ontogeny of segmental speech organizationR01DC000633 · NIDCD · UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY · PI NITTROUER, SUSAN · 1994 to 2015
$3.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOne task of childhood involves learning to optimally weight acoustic cues in the speech signal in order to recover phonemic categories. This study examined the extent to which spectral degradation, as associated with cochlear implants, might interfere. The 3 goals were to measure, for adults and children, (a) cue weighting with spectrally degraded signals, (b) sensitivity to degraded cues, and (c) word recognition for degraded signals.

methodTwenty-three adults and 36 children (10 and 8 years old) labeled spectrally degraded stimuli from /bɑ/-to-/wɑ/ continua varying in formant and amplitude rise time (FRT and ART). They also discriminated degraded stimuli from FRT and ART continua, and recognized words.

resultsA developmental increase in the weight assigned to FRT in labeling was clearly observed, with a slight decrease in weight assigned to ART. Sensitivity to these degraded cues measured by the discrimination task could not explain variability in cue weighting. FRT cue weighting explained significant variability in word recognition; ART cue weighting did not.

conclusionSpectral degradation affects children more than adults, but that degradation cannot explain the greater diminishment in children's weighting of FRT. It is suggested that auditory training could strengthen the weighting of spectral cues for implant recipients.

Indexed as

CuesLanguage DevelopmentSpeech AcousticsSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultChildCochlear ImplantsFemaleHearing LossHumansMaleRecognition, PsychologyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25611214
PMCPMC4398599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.