ArticleMedicine2022
The effect of lexical tone experience on English intonation perception in Mandarin-speaking cochlear-implanted children.
Article in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear-implant Mandarin tone recognition with a disyllabic word corpus.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
To examine the effect of lexical tone experience on English intonation perception in Mandarin-speaking cochlear-implanted children during second language acquisition in Taiwan. A retrospective cohort study. A tertiary referred center. Fourteen children with cochlear implant (CI) in the experimental group, and 9 normal hearing children in the control group were enrolled in this study. Cochlear implantation and hearing rehabilitation. Two speech recognition accuracies were examined: (1) Lexical tone recognition (4-alternative forced choice, AFC), (2) English Sentence Intonation (2AFC). The overall accuracies for tone perception are 61.13% (standard deviation, SD = 10.84%) for CI group and 93.82% (SD = 1.80%) for normal hearing group. Tone 4 and Tone 1 were more easily to be recognized than tone 2 and tone 3 in the pediatric CI recipients (cCI) group. In English intonation perception, the overall accuracies are 61.82% (SD = 16.85%) for CI group, and 97.59% (SD = 4.73%) for normal hearing group. Significant high correlation (R = .919, P ≦ .000) between lexical tone perception and English intonation perception is noted. There is no significant difference for English intonation perception accuracies between Mandarin-speaking cCI (61.82%) and English-speaking cCI (70.13%, P = .11). Mandarin-speaking cochlear-implanted children showed significant deficits in perception of lexical tone and English intonation relative to normal hearing children. There was no tonal language benefit in Mandarin-speaking cochlear-implanted children's English intonation perception, compared to the English-speaking cochlear-implanted peers. For cochlear-implanted children, better lexical tone perception comes with better English intonation perception. Enhancing Mandarin prosodic perception for cochlear-implanted children may benefit their command of intonation in English.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.