Comparing Auditory-Only and Audiovisual Word Learning for Children with Hearing Loss

Autor/inn/en	McDaniel, Jena; Camarata, Stephen; Yoder, Paul
Titel	Comparing Auditory-Only and Audiovisual Word Learning for Children with Hearing Loss
Quelle	In: Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 23 (2018) 4, S.382-398 (17 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (McDaniel, Jena)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1081-4159
DOI	10.1093/deafed/eny016
Schlagwörter	Hearing Impairments; Deafness; Speech Communication; Language Skills; Cues; Receptive Language; Preschool Children; Auditory Stimuli; Visual Stimuli; Multisensory Learning; Vocabulary Development + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Hearing impairment; Hörbehinderung; Gehörlosigkeit; Taubstummheit; Language skill; Sprachkompetenz; Stichwort; Rezeptive Kommunikationsfähigkeit; Pre-school age; Preschool age; Child; Children; Pre-school education; Preschool education; Vorschulalter; Kind; Kinder; Vorschulkind; Vorschulkinder; Vorschulerziehung; Vorschule; Auditive Stimulation; Sensorische Stimulation; Wortschatzarbeit
Abstract	Although reducing visual input to emphasize auditory cues is a common practice in pediatric auditory (re)habilitation, the extant literature offers minimal empirical evidence for whether unisensory auditory-only (AO) or multisensory audiovisual (AV) input is more beneficial to children with hearing loss for developing spoken language skills. Using an adapted alternating treatments single case research design, we evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of a receptive word learning intervention with and without access to visual speechreading cues. Four preschool children with prelingual hearing loss participated. Based on probes without visual cues, three participants demonstrated strong evidence for learning in the AO and AV conditions relative to a control (no-teaching) condition. No participants demonstrated a differential rate of learning between AO and AV conditions. Neither an inhibitory effect predicted by a unisensory theory nor a beneficial effect predicted by a multisensory theory for providing visual cues was identified. Clinical implications are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Oxford University Press. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, UK. Tel: +44-1865-353907; Fax: +44-1865-353485; e-mail: jnls.cust.serv@oxfordjournals.org; Web site: http://jdsde.oxfordjournals.org/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01