Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41693035›Full record

ArticleEar and hearing

Speech Perception in Noise: Do Children Hear Their Peers Differently Than Adults?

Qian-Jie Fu, Srikanta K Mishra, John J Galvin, Monica Trevino, Anu Nair

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Qian-Jie FuDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Srikanta K MishraDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
John J GalvinHouse Institute Foundation, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Monica TrevinoDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
Anu NairDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.

Funding

Functional Consequences of Early Childhood Otitis MediaR01DC021702 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Srikanta Mishra, Chhayakanta Patro · 2024 to 2026
$1.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC021702NIH/NIDCD 1R01DC021702
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildren are constantly exposed to a wide range of speech sources, not only from adults but also from their peers. Yet, the majority of speech perception research has predominantly relied on adult-produced speech as the primary stimulus for pediatric listeners. This oversight is critical, as child and adult speech differ significantly in terms of acoustics and phonetics. These differences raise an important question: How do children process speech produced by both adults and their peers, especially in the presence of background noise? Understanding this dynamic is crucial, as the ability to recognize speech in noisy environments is central to communication and learning. The present study aimed to bridge this gap by investigating how children and adults differ in their recognition of speech-in-noise, particularly when the speech targets are produced by children versus adults. By examining how children process these differences, this work provides invaluable insights into their speech processing mechanisms.

methodsThe study included 70 typically developing children aged 4 to 17 years (mean age = 9.9) and 27 adults. Speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) were measured for both child- and adult-target talkers in speech-shaped noise. The child target was produced by a 7-year-old girl, while an adult female produced the adult target.

resultsAnalyses revealed that children achieved significantly lower (better) SRTs with child-produced speech compared with adult-produced speech. Interestingly that the effect of the target talker (adult or child) did not differ significantly between listener groups. However, a significant trend emerged showing an interaction between age and target talker. The improvement in SRT with age differed between adult and child talkers, with younger listeners (<10 years) exhibiting a greater advantage for child talkers, which diminished as age increased. A weak correlation between SRTs for child and adult targets suggested that adult-based speech perception tests may not fully represent children's speech recognition abilities.

conclusionsThis study underscores the importance of considering child-produced speech in speech perception research, particularly in noisy environments. The developmental differences in speech-in-noise recognition between adult and child talkers suggest that speech perception abilities in children may not follow the same patterns for both talker types. These findings highlight the need for more comprehensive pediatric speech perception studies that include child-target speech stimuli, which could enhance our understanding of speech processing in children and potentially inform interventions and hearing device fittings tailored specifically to the unique needs of pediatric listeners.

Indexed as

NoiseSpeech PerceptionAdolescentAdultAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMalePeer GroupSpeech Reception Threshold TestYoung AdultAdult voiceChild voiceDigit tripletSpeech perception

Identifiers

PMID41693035
PMCPMC13397368

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.