Effects of Segmental and Suprasegmental Speech Perception on Reading in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine whether suprasegmental speech perception contributes unique variance in predictions of reading decoding and comprehension for prelingually deaf children using two devices, at least one of which is a cochlear implant (CI).

Method: A total of 104, 5- to 9-year-old CI recipients completed tests of segmental perception (e.g., word recognition in quiet and noise, recognition of vowels and consonants in quiet), suprasegmental perception (e.g., talker and stress discrimination, nonword stress repetition, and emotion identification), and nonverbal intelligence. Two years later, participants completed standardized tests of reading decoding and comprehension. Using regression analyses, the unique contribution of suprasegmental perception to reading skills was determined after controlling for demographic characteristics and segmental perception performance.

Results: Standardized reading scores of the CI recipients increased with nonverbal intelligence for both decoding and comprehension. Female gender was associated with higher comprehension scores. After controlling for gender and nonverbal intelligence, segmental perception accounted for approximately 4% and 2% of the variance in decoding and comprehension, respectively. After controlling for nonverbal intelligence, gender, and segmental perception, suprasegmental perception accounted for an extra 4% and 7% unique variance in reading decoding and reading comprehension, respectively.

Conclusions: Suprasegmental perception operates independently from segmental perception to facilitate good reading outcomes for these children with CIs. Clinicians and educators should be mindful that early perceptual skills may have long-term benefits for literacy. Research on how to optimize suprasegmental perception, perhaps through hearing-device programming and/or training strategies, is needed.

Figure 1.

Violin plots of the cochlear implant participants' (n = 104) data from the tests in the Segmental speech perception battery. Percent correct scores are shown for the Lexical Neighborhood Test in Quiet (LNT-Q), LNT in Noise (LNT-N), and the On-Line Imitative Speech-Pattern Contrast (OlimSpac) test. The median and interquartile range are shown by the white dot and the thick gray bar, respectively. The mean score is shown by the black horizontal line. The dots show individual data points. The thin gray line represents scores falling outside the interquartile range. On each side of the gray line is a kernel density estimation to show the distribution shape of the data. Wider sections represent a higher probability that the population will take on the given value and thinner sections represent a lower probability.

Figure 2.

Violin plots of the cochlear implant participants' (n = 104) data from the tests in the suprasegmental speech perception battery. Percent correct scores are shown for Talker Discrimination (TalkDisc), Stress Discrimination (StressDisc), Emotion Identification (EmotID), and Nonword Stress (NWRStress) tests. Chance performance for the Talker and Stress Discrimination, and Emotion Identification tests are shown with blue horizontal lines. See the Figure 1 caption for details on the violin-plot attributes.

Figure 3.

Violin plots of the cochlear implant participants' (n = 104) standard scores for the Basic Skills (Decoding) and Reading Comprehension subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test. Standard scores of 85 and 115, shown with the blue dashed lines, are 1 SD below and above the average score (100) for the normative sample. See the Figure 1 caption for details on the violin-plot attributes.