Bisensory and unisensory training of auditory-visual speech perception [Abstract]
AuthorOerlemans, Michael; BLAMEY, PETER; WALES, ROGER
Source TitleAustralian Journal of Audiology
Document TypeJournal Item
CitationsOerlemans, M., Blamey, P., & Wales, R. (1994). Bisensory and unisensory training of auditory-visual speech perception [Abstract]. Australian Journal of Audiology, 15(suppl.2), 38-39.
Access StatusOpen Access
This is a publisher’s version of an article published in Australian Journal of Audiology 1994. This version is reproduced with permission from the publisher, Australian Academic Press. http://www.australianacademicpress.com.au/
The choice of strategy in auditory-visual training remains a controversial topic. Bisensory training involves exposing the subject to both of the main sources of information (auditory-visual). Unisensory training, on the other hand, focuses individually on each of the main modalities of sensory input (auditory, visual). Proponents of the bisensory training view suggest that auditory-visual training is most appropriate since this is the dominant mode of interaction in conventional communication settings. Those advocating unisensory training, suggest focussing on each modality separately prevents interference from one sense inhibiting training of the other sense. A training study is presented where three groups of four normally hearing subjects were given thirty-six sessions of analytic training using discrimination recognition and repetition tasks. Subjects were allocated to one of three groups based on their score on the CNC word test at the first evaluation; bisensory training (BS), bisensory input with unisensory training (BSUT) and unisensory training (US). Auditory stimuli were filtered (300Hz low-pass) and all stimuli were presented in the context of 50dB of white noise. Evaluations were conducted at five points (two pre-training and two post-training) to measure improvement of five phoneme, word and sentence tasks. The evaluations were conducted in all of the modalities of interest (auditory-visual, auditory, visual). In general there were no group differences across the training tasks, although the US group showed greater improvement that the BSUT and BS groups on vowel perception. Results of a phonetic feature analysis of word level performance will be presented. There is a tendency for bisensory training to result in better sentence level performance that unisensory training. Results are discussed in the light of current models of auditory-visual interaction.
Keywordsbisensory; unisensory; speech perception; auditory-visual training
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References
- Graeme Clark Collection