Publication Date

1988

Document Type

Dissertation/Thesis

First Advisor

Seaver, Earl J., III

Degree Name

M.A. (Master of Arts)

Legacy Department

Department of Communicative Disorders

LCSH

Speech; Consonants; Word recognition; Hearing impaired

Abstract

Through clinical observation it is apparent that hearing-impaired listeners, with similar pure-tone threshold configurations, differ in word recognition abilities. It was the purpose of this investigation to determine: (a) whether normal-hearing (Group A) and hearing-impaired listeners use anticipatory coarticulation cues for consonant identification in a similar manner, (b) if hearing-impaired listeners with good word recognition abilities (Group B) and hearing-impaired listeners with poor word recognition abilities (Group C) use anticipatory coarticulation cues in a similar fashion, and (c) what feature information was used most by the different subject groups. Unmodified and truncated syllables within a carrier phrase were presented to the three listening groups. Subjects' consonant identification data were analyzed by subject group and by cut condition. The normal-hearing subject group was found not to be significantly different from the hearing-impaired listener group with good word recognition skills in the ability to use cues from anticipatory coarticulation for correct consonant identification. Yet, the normal-hearing listeners were significantly different from the hearing-impaired listeners with poor word recognition skills in their ability to identify correctly consonants in truncated speech. Further, it was found that hearing-impaired listeners with good word recognition skills were not significantly different from hearing-impaired listeners with poor word recognition skills in their ability to use anticipatory coarticulation cues for consonant identification. Also, it was found that all subjects perceived consonant features in a similar order of importance. However, when compared to normal-hearing listeners, hearing-impaired listeners were less efficient in transferring feature information.

Comments

Bibliography: pages 56-59.

Extent

vi, 64 pages

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University

Rights Statement

In Copyright

Rights Statement 2

NIU theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from Huskie Commons for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without the written permission of the authors.

Media Type

Text

Download

Share

COinS