Graeme Clark Collection

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Phonetic and phonological changes in the connected speech of children using a cochlear implant
    Grogan, M. L. ; Barker, E. J. ; Dettman, S. J. ; Blamey, P. J. ( 1995)
    In excess of 5,000 children, with profound hearing impairment, have received a cochlear implant hearing device. Researchers have recently begun to study the speech production skills of these children.1-6 This topic is of interest because the speech of young prelingually or postlingually deaf children is in a constant state of development. The effectiveness of the implant, therefore, must be measured in its ability to provide enough auditory information for the child to develop intelligible speech. This is in addition to the maintenance of intelligible speech in the case of older postlingually deaf children or adults. The aim of the present study was to investigate some characteristics of the connected speech of a selected group of children from the University of Melbourne Cochlear Implant Programme. More specifically, the study aimed to determine how these characteristics changed over time. Studies of conversational speech samples are useful in that they do not depend on imitation yet they do reflect the child's everyday communication skills and are sensitive to co-articulatory effects. Analyses performed on the preoperative and postoperative data aimed to detect both the phonetic and phonologic changes in the segmental features of speech. The following questions were addressed: 1) What was the pattern of change in the phonetic inventories from before to after implantation? 2) Was there a difference in the correct production of consonants depending on their position in the word? 3) Did the group performance for correct production of phonemes change significantly from before to after implantation? 4) Did performance change over time for individuals? 5) What were the most common phonologic processes and was there a significant reduction in any of these processes from before to after implantation?
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Vowel imitation task: results over time for 28 cochlear implant children under the age of eight years
    Dettman, S. J. ; Barker, E. J. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Dawson, P. W. ; Blamey, P. J. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    With increasing numbers of implanted children under the age of 4 years, numerous researchers have reminded us of the need for valid, sensitive, and reliable tests of developing speech perception.1,2 In addition to studies of the efficacy of implanted prostheses, there is a need to investigate the many variables that influence children's communicative performance, such as changes in speech-coding strategy, updated speech-processing systems, the effects of various training regimens, and the selection of educational and communication modes.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Speech perception in children using the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy
    Cowan, R. S. C. ; Brown, C. ; Whitford, L. A. ; Galvin, K. L. ; Sarant, J. Z. ; Barker, E. J. ; Shaw, S. ; King, A. ; Skok, M. ; Seligman, P. M. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Everingham, C. ; Gibson, W. P. R. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    The Speak speech-processing strategy, developed by the University of Melbourne and commercialized by Cochlear Pty Limited for use in the new Spectra 22 speech processor, has been shown to provide improved speech perception for adults in both quiet and noisy situations. The present study evaluated the ability of children experienced in the use of the Multipeak (Mpeak) speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Minisystem-22 cochlear implant) to adapt to and benefit from the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Spectra 22 speech processor). Twelve children were assessed using Mpeak and Speak over a period of 8 months. All of the children had over 1 year's previous experience with Mpeak, and all were able to score significantly on open-set word and sentence tests using the cochlear implant alone. Children were assessed with both live-voice and recorded speech materials, including Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant monosyllabic words and Speech Intelligibility Test sentences. Assessments were made in both quiet and in noise. Assessments were made at 3-week intervals to investigate the ability of the children to adapt to the new speech-processing strategy. For most of the children, a significant advantage was evident when using the Speak strategy as compared with Mpeak. For 4 of the children, there was no decrement in speech perception scores immediately following fitting with Speak. Eight of the children showed a small (10% to 20%) decrement in speech perception scores for between 3 and 6 weeks following the changeover to Speak. After 24 weeks' experience with Speak, 11 of the children had shown a steady increase in speech perception scores, with final Speak scores higher than for Mpeak. Only 1 child showed a significant decrement in speech perception with Speak, which did not recover to original Mpeak levels.