Comparing bimodal perception skills in infant hearing-aid and cochlear-implant users Brittan A. Barker & J. Bruce Tomblin Department of Otolaryngology—

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cochlear Implant Programming for Infants and Toddlers Roxanne J. Aaron, MA, CCC-A, FAAA Board Certified in Audiology with a Specialty in Cochlear Implants.
Advertisements

Audiological Management: What Everyone Needs to Know Antonia Brancia Maxon, Ph.D., CCC-A 1, 2 Kathleen Watts, M.A. 2 Karen M. Ditty, Au.D., CCC-A 2 1 New.
Introduction to Cochlear Implants for EI Service Providers Roxanne J. Aaron, MA, CCC-A, FAAA The Moog Center for Deaf Education March 2005.
Optimizing Outcomes for Early Identified Children Through Inclusive Service Provision Sarah Wainscott & Marion Helfrich The River School Washington, D.C.
Cochlear Implants in Children
Enhancing and Assessing Abstract Thinking in Online Class Discussions: An Example from Deaf Education.
Karen Iler Kirk PhD, Hearing Science, The University of Iowa –Speech perception & cochlear implants Professor, Dept. of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences.
Acknowledgments This study was funded in part by a grant from the National Institutes of Health-Institute on Deafness and other Communicative Disorders.
David J. Ertmer, Ph.D. Associate Professor Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences Your picture here.
CHAPTER 6 PERCEPTION. Learning Objectives What are the views of constructivists and nativists on the nature/nurture issue as it relates to sensation and.
Vocal Emotion Recognition with Cochlear Implants Xin Luo, Qian-Jie Fu, John J. Galvin III Presentation By Archie Archibong.
Pre-operative evaluation and post-operative rehabilitation for paediatric cochlear implantation Han Demin, M.D., Ph.D. Beijing Institute of Otolaryngology.
MEG Experiments Stimulation and Recording Setup Educational Seminar Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis February 8th, 2005.
Introduction disruption in unilateral deafness is underestimated (Laryngoscope Sep;122(9): ) educational 12-41% additional needs (Bess 1988)
The Yorkshire Auditory Implant Service Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Children: Assessment, Rehabilitation and Outcomes Jane Martin, Catherine.
Lecture 4: Perception and Cognition in Immersive Virtual Environments Dr. Xiangyu WANG.
CSD 5400 REHABILITATION PROCEDURES FOR THE HARD OF HEARING Auditory Training.
Educational Benefits On Communication Behaviors In Persons With Dementia Kristi Morris-Johnson, B.A.S., Bobby Jo Mineheine, B.A.S., and Mark Mizuko, Ph.D,
Discussion and Conclusions 9 of the 10 subjects were able to discriminate speech better with the radio aid at 1m, 3m and 10m than with out the radio aid.
Unit 2 The Learning approach Study in Detail Watson & Raynor (1920)
ENGINEERING BIOMEDICAL Michael G. Heinz Background: PhD at MIT –Speech and Hearing Bioscience and Technology Postdoctoral Fellow at Johns Hopkins Univ.
National Cochlear Implant Programme Beaumont Hospital & Children’s University Hospital, Temple Street Bilateral Cochlear Implants Jennifer Robertson, Clinical.
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)
Cochlear Implant Presentation Jennifer Callaway M.S. CCC-SLP Speech/Language Pathologist Grafton Elementary School John Long Middle School
Cochlear Implants By Di’Aundria Davis.
Impact on Access: Individuals with COCHLEAR IMPLANTS In Educational and Employment Settings September 14, 2010 Design by Ron Jaxon.
What is a Cochlear Implant?
Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Bosch, L. (2009) Developmental shift in the discrimination of vowel contrasts in bilingual infants: is the distributional account.
R ECEPTIVE VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN CHILDREN WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS : Achievement in an intensive, auditory-oral educational setting Heather Hayes, Ann.
Infant Hearing Screening in the US, 2001: Results from the ECLS-B Study May S. Chiu, B.S. Magdaliz Gorritz, B.S. Howard J. Hoffman, M.A. National Institute.
Year Review Nancy Rader May 13, esearch Emotion and Working Memory Temperament Infant Perception Attention and Early Language.
CASE 1/2 SURGEON: Alex Huber University Hospital Zurich (Switzerland)
PERCEPTION. Nature and Nurture Constructivists (Nurture) –Perception is constructed through learning –Declines due to environmental influences E.g., disease,
Creating sound valuewww.hearingcrc.org Kelley Graydon 1,2,, Gary Rance 1,2, Dani Tomlin 1,2 Richard Dowell 1,2 & Bram Van Dun 1,4. 1 The HEARing Cooperative.
The Freedom Cochlear Implant: Another Innovation from Cochlear Children with Cochlear Implants on their Way to Inclusion Дети с кохлеарными имплантатами.
Assistive Technology Assistive technology is a valuable tool to assist students with learning disabilities in gaining the knowledge, skills, and abilities.
SPED 537 ECSE Methods Multiple Disabilities Ch 6 Deborah Chen, Ph.D. California State University, Northridge March 27-28, 2006.
Investigating the Use of a Blocked Trial Procedure to Facilitate Conditional Discriminations Nicholas K. Reetz, Paula Petit, Sarah Camp, Valerie VanTussi,
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Use of Signed Communication Among Parents of Cochlear- Implanted Children with Additional Disabilities.
Cochlear Implants American Sign Language Children & Cochlear Implants Psychological Evaluation of Implant Candidates James H. Johnson, Ph.D., ABPP Department.
METHODOLOGY INTRODUCTION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LITERATURE Low frequency information via a hearing aid has been shown to increase speech intelligibility in noise.
Project CLASS “Children Learning Academic Success Skills” This work was supported by IES Grant# R305H to David Rabiner Computerized Attention Training.
Michael Vandiver BME 281 Section 2 24 th Sept
Assessing Organizational Communication: Strategic Communication Audits Chapter 3 Conducting Team Audits.
Chapter 6 Perception. Nature and Nurture Constructivists (Nurture) –Perception is constructed through learning –Declines due to environmental influences.
1. Background Evidence of phonetic perception during the first year of life: from language-universal listeners to native listeners: Consonants and vowels:
Cochlear Implant Presented by: Taylor Young and Emily Schwarz.
Sh s Children with CIs produce ‘s’ with a lower spectral peak than their peers with NH, but both groups of children produce ‘sh’ similarly [1]. This effect.
Assistive Technology- Cochlear Implants By Anne Bartoszek.
The Discrimination of Vowels and Consonants by Lara Lalonde, Jacynthe Bigras, Jessica Flanagan, Véronick Boucher, Janie Paris & Lyzanne Cuddihy.
Need for cortical evoked potentials Assessment and determination of amplification benefit in actual hearing aid users is an issue that continues to be.
1 Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception Sandra Anacleto uOttawa.
Examining Constraints on Speech Growth in Children with Cochlear Implants J. Bruce Tomblin The University of Iowa.
CSD 5400 REHABILITATION PROCEDURES FOR THE HARD OF HEARING Amplification Implantable Hearing Aids Cochlear Implants.
Cochlear Implants: A Closer Look 11/13/2006. What is a Cochlear Implant (CI)? According to the National Institute on Deafness and other Communication.
12/6/20151 Cochlear implants in the older patient Mark Pyle MD Professor of surgery and Academic Vice Chair Division of Otolaryngology.
Functional Listening Evaluations:
Bosch & Sebastián-Gallés Simultaneous Bilingualism and the Perception of a Language-Specific Vowel Contrast in the First Year of Life.
Use of a Modified Changeover Delay Procedure to Decrease Scrolled Responses by a Child With Autism Nicholas K. Reetz, Shantel R. Mullins, Sara L. Daugherty,
What is policy surveillance? What are the methods? Why is it important? November 2015.
Development of Rhyming Tasks in Preschool Aged Children with Hearing Loss Mary Katherine Connelly, Kaylie McNally Joan A. Luckhurst, Ph.D., CCC/SLP, faculty.
Five Main Educational Challenges of Children with Cochlear Implants Academic Acoustic Attention Associative Adjustment How prepared are speech-language.
What can we expect of cochlear implants for listening to speech in noisy environments? Andrew Faulkner: UCL Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences.
Date of download: 6/3/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Outcomes for Cochlear Implant Users With Significant.
CLINICAL TRIALS.
4aPPa32. How Susceptibility To Noise Varies Across Speech Frequencies
D I S C U S S I O N & C O N C L U S I O N
THE BAHRAINI EXPERIENCE
Meeting Participant Needs Theoretical Foundations
Science problem of the month
Presentation transcript:

Comparing bimodal perception skills in infant hearing-aid and cochlear-implant users Brittan A. Barker & J. Bruce Tomblin Department of Otolaryngology— Head & Neck Surgery University of Iowa

Acknowledgements Victoria C. Klein Linda J. Spencer Sandie M. Bass-Ringdahl Courtney M. Burke Michelle L. Hughes The University of Iowa’s Cochlear Implant Team The infants and their families who volunteered their time

research grant 2 P50 DC00242 from the National Institutes on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health. grant RR00059 from the General Clinical Research Centers Program, NCRR, National Institutes of Health. the Iowa Lions Sight and Hearing Foundation. Research supported in part by…

The age at which infants undergo surgery for cochlear implants has considerably declined within recent years. There is a need to systematically collect information regarding hearing-aid and cochlear- implant “benefit” from these infants. Prior research shows that infants with normal hearing have the capabilities to store information about the acoustic signal and begin to learn from it. Background

…to build on the bimodal perception work of Patterson & Werker (2002, 2003) and determine the feasibility of replicating their findings with infants, who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants. …to determine the point in development at which infants, who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants, are able to successfully match phonetic information from the lips and voice. Objectives

Design: on-going, longitudinal study that approximates a multiple-baseline design. Participants: 10 infants’ data (3 females) will be presented; infants were assessed at least once prior to cochlear implantation and previous to cochlear implant stimulation. Procedure: The Split-Screen Preferential Looking Procedure (SPLP; Hollich, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff, 2001) was used to assess bimodal perception skills. Methodology

Stimuli and apparatus /a/ versus /i/ DV camera video monitor experimenter video monitor infant caregiver images appearing on video monitor for infant’s viewing

Experimental design The experiment consisted of two phases, a familiarization phase and a test phase. The familiarization phase was used to introduce the infant to each video in isolation and then in company. No sound was presented. During the succeeding test phase, the same images were presented simultaneously, side-by-side and sound was introduced.

Coding data Each infant’s gaze duration, during the test phase, was summed for each display and averaged across stimulus conditions. This yielded the mean total looking time (in seconds) for each image during the test phase.

Results: individual data, normal hearing thresholds 3-months-old

Results: individual data, cochlear-implant user CI-01 IS = initial stimulation

Results: individual data, cochlear-implant user CI-02 * p <.05

Results: individual data, cochlear-implant user CI-03 * p <.05

Results: group data * n = 10n = 6n = 7n = 3n = 1 p <.05

Exploration of bimodal perception skills in infant, cochlear-implant users is feasible. The cochlear-implant users’ auditory experience via hearing aids was different from the auditory experience via cochlear implants. Individual differences were noted across the participants’ test sessions. Conclusions

Evaluate and compare the differences in audibility and C-levels across children. Compare the emergence of bimodal perception and the emergence canonical babbling. Explore the development of speech perception skills in infants with a variety of hearing levels. Future directions

SPLP Example Experiment: bimodal perception of /a/ & /i/ /i//i//a//a//i//i//a//a/ Familiarization: 6 trials (no sound) with 2s ISI of 9s (2 times) Test phase: 4 trials (sound: counterbalance /a/ AND /i/) with 2s ISI of /i//i//i//i//a//a//a//a/ 27s /a/27s /i/ (2 times) * articulations occur once every 3s, thus 9 artics/trial * sound presented, left-right positioning, and order of familiarization are counterbalanced—yielding 8 conditions