[en] This study investigated the effect of degraded listening conditions and speech rate on children’s answer accuracy and response time in a speech perception task. Fifty-three normally-developing children (aged 5-6 years) listened to 72 pseudo-word pairs presented at two different speech rates (normal and fast) and four different listening conditions (normal voice in silence [control], dysphonic voice in silence, normal voice in speech-shaped noise (SSN) at 0 dBA SNR, and dysphonic voice in SSN at 0 dBA SNR). The participants had to decide whether the pseudo-words were the same (e.g. /filam/ - /filam/) or different (e.g. /mafin/ - /nafin/). For either speech rate, degraded listening conditions were found to significantly decrease answer accuracy. Regarding response time, speech rate interacted with listening condition: At fast as opposed to normal speech rate, children responded slower to normal voice in SSN but faster to the three other listening conditions. Our findings suggest that speech signal degradations may disrupt children’s speech perception even at normal speed. Speech rate might influence the extent of listening effort associated with adverse listening conditions. A good quality and adequate transmission of the speech signal may help children to listen effectively.
Research Center/Unit :
PsyNCog - Psychologie et Neuroscience Cognitives - ULiège EQUALE - Évaluation et Qualité de l'Enseignement - ULiège
Disciplines :
Engineering, computing & technology: Multidisciplinary, general & others Otolaryngology Social & behavioral sciences, psychology: Multidisciplinary, general & others Languages & linguistics
Author, co-author :
Schiller, Isabel ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Logopédie > Logopédie des troubles de la voix
Morsomme, Dominique ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Logopédie > Logopédie des troubles de la voix
Kob, Malte
Remacle, Angélique ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Logopédie > Logopédie des troubles de la voix
Language :
English
Title :
Children’s perception of degraded speech at normal vs. fast speech rate
Publication date :
12 September 2019
Event name :
23rd International Congress on Acoustics
Event date :
from 09-09-2019 to 13-09.2019
Audience :
International
Main work title :
Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics, integrating 4th EAA Euroregio 2019
Main work alternative title :
[en] ICA 2019
Author, co-author :
Ochmann, Martin
Publisher :
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Akustik e.V. (DEGA), Aachen, Germany
Elliott LL. Performance of children aged 9 to 17 years on a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence material with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am. 1979;66(3):651-653.
Huyck JJ. Comprehension of degraded speech matures during adolescence. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(4):1012-1022.
Bradley JS, Sato H. Speech recognition by grades 1, 3, and 6 children in classrooms. Can Acoust. 2004;32(3):26-27.
Shield B, Dockrell J. The effect of noise on children at school: A review. Build Acoust. 2003;10(2):97-106.
Haake M, Hansson K, Gulz A, Schötz S, Sahlén B. The slower the better? Does the speaker's speech rate influence children's performance on a language comprehension test? Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2014;16(2):181-190.
Hayiou-Thomas ME, Plunkett K. Simulating SLI: General cognitive processing stressors can produce a specific linguistic profile. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2004;47:1347-1362.
Montgomery JW. Effects of input rate and age on the real-time language processing of children with specific language impairment. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2005;39(1):115-133.
Wingfield A. Evolution of models of working memory and cognitive resources. Ear Hear. 2016;37:35S-43S.
Morsomme D, Minell L, Verduyckt I. Impact of teachers' voice quality on children's language processing skills. VOCOL: Stem En Stemstoorn. 2011;9-15.
Nishi K, Lewis DE, Hoover BM, Choi S, Stelmachowicz PG. Children's recognition of American English consonants in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010;127(5):3177-3188.
Fallon M, Trehub SE, Schneider BA. Children's perception of speech in multitalker babble. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000;108(6):3023-3029.
Hurtig A, Van de Poll MK, Pekkola EP, Hygge S, Ljung R, Sörqvist P. Children's recall of words spoken in their first and second language: Effects of signal-to-noise ratio and reverberation time. Front Psychol. 2016;6:2029.
Morton V, Watson DR. The impact of impaired vocal quality on children's ability to process spoken language. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2001;26(1):17-25.
Klatte M, Lachmann T, Meis M. Effects of noise and reverberation on speech perception and listening comprehension of children and adults in a classroom-like setting. Noise Health. 2010;12(49):270-282.
Rogerson J, Dodd B. Is there an effect of dysphonic teachers' voices on children's processing of spoken language? J Voice. 2005;19(1):47-60.
Visentin C, Prodi N. A matrixed speech-in-noise test to discriminate favorable listening conditions by means of intelligibility and response time results. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(6):1497-1516.
Lyberg-Åhlander V, Haake M, Brännström J, Schötz S, Sahlén B. Does the speaker's voice quality influence children's performance on a language comprehension test? Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2015;17(1):63-73.
Sahlén B, Haake M, von Lochow H., Holm L, Kastberg T, Brännström KJ, et al. Is children's listening effort in background noise influenced by the speaker's voice quality? Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2017;43(2):47-55.
Khomsi A. ELO: Évaluation du Langage Orale [language test]. ECPA Pearson; 2001.
Korkman M, Kirk U, Kemp SL. NEPSY II. Administrative manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 2007a.
Korkman M, Kirk U, Kemp SL. NEPSY II. Clinical and interpretative manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 2007b.
Macchi L, Descours C, Girard É, Guitton É, Morel C, Timmermans N, et al. ELDP: Épreuve Lilloise de Discrimination Phonologique [ELDP1 protocol & manual]. 2018 [cited 2019 May 1]. Available from: http://orthophonie.univ-lille2.fr/stocks/stock-contents/epreuve-lilloise-de-discriminationphonologique.html.
Autesserre D, Deltour JJ, Lacert P. (1988). EDP4-8: Épreuve de Discrimination Phonémique pour enfants de 4 à 8 ans. Issy-les-Moulineaux: Éditions et Applications Psychologiques; 1988.
Schiller I, Remacle A, Morsomme D. NODYS: NOrmophonic and DYsphonic Speech samples [database]. 2019 [cited 2019 May 1]. In: Mendeley data [internet]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/g2fmkw8t85.1
Schiller I, Remacle A, Morsomme D. Imitating dysphonic Voice: A suitable technique to create speech stimuli for spoken Language Processing Tasks? Submitted to Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2019; under review.
Houtgast T, Steeneken HJM, Ahnert W, Braida LD, Drullman R, Festen JM, et al. Past, present and future of the speech transmission index. Soesterberg: TNO Hum Factors; 2002.
Mathôt S, Schreij D, Theeuwes J. OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2012;44(2):314-324.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer Software]. 2013 [cited 2019 May 1]. Available from: http://www.Rproject.org/.
