This clinical trial investigated the ability of concurrent speech segregation in hearing impaired children. The auditory behavioral responses and auditory late responses (ALRs) were compared between test and control groups prior to vowel auditory training and after 3 and 6 months of vowel auditory training to find the effects of bottom-up training on concurrent speech segregation in hearing impaired children.
Methods:
Auditory behavioral responses for 5 vowels and ALRs for double synthetic vowels, with special physical properties, were recorded in a timetable in 30 hearing impaired children (test group = 15 and control group = 15).
Results:
Identification score and reaction time data showed that the test group was approximately proficient for some vowels (P < .05 for vowels /æ/, /e/, and /u:/) and took less time to process after 6 months of training. N1-P2 amplitude indexing of the vowel change detection and reflecting central auditory speech representation without active client participation has been increased in the test group (P < .05).
Conclusion:
The present study showed training-related improvements in concurrent speech segregation. This information provided evidence for bottom-up training based on F0, its differences in auditory scene analysis, and neural underpinnings.
BregmanAS, ed. Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press; 1990.
2.
RitterWSussmanEMolholmS. Evidence that the mismatch negativity system works on the basis of objects. Neuroreport. 2000;11:61-63.
3.
SussmanERitterWVaughanHGJr.Attention affects the organization of auditory input associated with the mismatch negativity system. Brain Res. 1998;789:130-138.
4.
SussmanERitterWVaughanHGJr.An investigation of the auditory streaming effect using event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology. 1999;36:22-34.
5.
DemanyL. Auditory stream segregation in infancy. Infant Behav Dev. 1982;5:261-276.
6.
SussmanECeponieneRShestakovaANaatanenRWinklerI. Auditory stream segregation processes operate similarly in school-aged children and adults. Hear Res. 2001;153:108-114.
7.
WinklerIKushnerenkoEHorváthJ. Newborn infants can organize the auditory world. PNAS. 2003;100:11812-11815.
BregmanAS. Auditory scene analysis. In: DallosPOertelD, eds. The Senses: A Comprehensive Reference. San Diego, CA: Elsevier; 2008:861-870.
10.
KatzJMedwetskyLBurkardRHoodLJ. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.
11.
Tye-MurrayN. Foundations of Aural Rehabilitation: Children, Adults, and Their Family Members. 2nd ed.Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning; 2004.
12.
MartinBASigalAKurtzbergDStapellsDR. The effects of decreased audibility produced by high-pass noise masking on cortical event-related potentials to speech sounds /ba/ and /da/. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;101:1585-1599.
13.
OstroffJMMartinBABoothroydA. Cortical evoked response to acoustic change within a syllable. Ear Hear. 1998;19:290-297.
14.
SharmaADormanM. Cortical auditory evoked potential correlates of categorical perception of voice-onset time. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;106:1078-1083.
WhitingKAMartinBAStapellsDR. The effects of broadband noise masking on cortical event-related potentials to speech sounds /ba/ and /da/. Ear Hear. 1998;19:218-231.
17.
VaughanHGJrRitterW. The sources of auditory evoked responses recorded from the human scalp. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1970;28:360-367.
18.
NaatanenRPictonT. The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology. 1987;24:375-425.
19.
WolpawJRPenryJK. A temporal component of the auditory evoked response. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1975;39:609-620.
20.
WoodsD. The component structure of the N1 wave of the human auditory evoked potential. In: KarmosGMolnarMCsepeVCziglerIDesmedtJ eds. Perspectives of Event-Related Potentials Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 1995:102-109.
21.
KorczakPAKurtzbergDStapellsDR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing AIDS on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear. 2005;26(2):165-185.
22.
TremblayKLBillingsCJFriesenLMSouzaPE. Neural representation of amplified speech sounds. Ear Hear. 2006;27(2):93-103.
23.
TremblayKLKrausN. Beyond the ear: central auditory plasticity. Otorhinolaryngologia. 2002;52(3):93-100.
24.
TremblayKKrausNMcGeeTPontonCOtisB. Central auditory plasticity: changes in the N1-P2 complex after speech-sound training. Ear Hear. 2001;22:79-90.
25.
HayesEWarrierCMNicolTZeckerSGKrausN. Neural plasticity following auditory training in children with learning problems. Clin Neurophysiol. 2003;114:673-684.
26.
HebbDO. Organization of Behavior. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1949.
27.
McGeeTKrausNNicolT. Is it really a mismatch negativity? An assessment of methods for determining response validity in individual subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997;104:359-368.
28.
PontonCDonMEggermontJJKwongB. Integrated mismatch negativity (MMNi): a noise free representation of evoked responses allowing single point distribution-free statistical tests. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997;104:381-382.
29.
HallJW. New Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses. Boston, MA: Pearson; 2006.
30.
KrausNMcGeeTCarrellTKingCTremblayKNicolT. Central auditory system plasticity associated with speech discrimination training. J Cogn Neurosci. 1995;7:25-32.
31.
TremblayKKrausNCarrellTMcGeeT. Central auditory system plasticity: generalization to novel stimuli following listening training. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102:3762-3773.
32.
TremblayKKrausNMcGeeT. The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiologic changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport. 1998;9:3557-3560.
33.
ReinkeKSHeYWangCAlainC. Perceptual learning modulates sensory evoked response during vowel segregation. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003;17(3):781-791.
34.
SnyderJSAlainC. Age-related changes in neural activity associated with concurrent vowel segregation. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005;24:492-499.
35.
DivenyiPLHauptKM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and lateral asymmetry effects. Ear Hear. 1997;18(1):42-61.
36.
DivenyiPLHauptKM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. II. Correlation analysis. Ear Hear. 1997;18(2):100-113.
37.
DivenyiPLHauptKM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. III. Factor representation. Ear Hear. 1997;18(3):189-201.
38.
GrimaultNMicheylCCarlyonRPAnhaudPColletL. Perceptual auditory stream segregation of sequences of complex sounds in subjects with normal and impaired hearing. Br J Audiol. 2001;35(3):173-182.
39.
AtienzaMCanteroJLDominguez-MarinE. The time course of neural changes underlying auditory perceptual learning. Learn Mem. 2002;9:138-150.
40.
CourchesneE. Neurophysiological correlates of cognitive development: changes in long-latency event-related potentials from childhood to adulthood. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1978;45:468-482.
41.
PontonCWDonMEggermontJJWaringMDMasudaA. Auditory system plasticity in children after long periods of complete deafness. Neuroreport. 1996;8:61-65.
42.
PontonCWDonMEggermontJJWaringMDMasudaA. Maturation of human cortical auditory function: differences between normal hearing and cochlear implant children. Ear Hear. 1996;17:430-437.
43.
PontonCWEggermontJJKwongBDonM. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: evidence from multi-channel evoked potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 2000;111:220-236.
44.
MartinBABoothroydA. Cortical, auditory, event-related potentials in response to periodic and aperiodic stimuli with the same spectral envelope. Ear Hear. 1999;20(1):33-44.
45.
MartinBATremblayKLStapellsDR. Principles and applications of cortical auditory evoked potentials. In: BurkardRDonMEggermontJ eds. Auditory Evoked Potentials. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007:482-507.
46.
SommersMSHumesLE. Auditory filter shapes in normal-hearing, noise-masked normal, and elderly listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993;93:2903-2914.
