The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Language Skills of Children with Early Cochlear Implantation
Abstract
In Brief Objective This study investigated factors contributing to the comprehension and production of English language by children with prelingual deafness after 4 to 7 yr of multichannel cochlear implant use. The analysis controlled for the effects of child and family characteristics so that educational factors most conducive to maximum implant benefit could be identified. Design A battery of language tests were administered to 181 8- and 9 - yr-old children from across the United States and Canada who received a cochlear implant by age 5. Tests of comprehension, verbal reasoning, narrative ability and spontaneous language production were administered either in speech and sign or in the child’s preferred communication mode. These constituted the Total Language measures. Spoken Language measures were derived from a speech-only language sample. Type and amount of educational intervention since implantation constituted the independent variables. Characteristics of the child and the family were considered intervening variables. A series of multiple regression analyses determined the amount of variance in Total Language and Spoken Language ability accounted for by the intervening variables and the amount of additional variance attributable to the independent variables. Results More than half of the children (with performance intelligence quotients in the average range) exhibited language skills that were similar to those of hearing 8 to 9 yr olds on measures of verbal reasoning, narrative ability, utterance length, and lexical diversity. Significant predictors of language ability were similar for Total and for Spoken Language outcomes and included greater nonverbal intelligence, smaller family size, higher socio-economic status and female gender. Age at receiving an implant did not affect language outcome. After the variance due to these variables was controlled, the primary rehabilitative factors associated with linguistic outcome were amount of mainstream class placement and an educational emphasis on speech and auditory skills. Conclusions Use of a cochlear implant has had a dramatic impact on the linguistic competence of profoundly hearing-impaired children. More than half of the children in this sample with average learning ability produced and understood English language at a level comparable with that of their hearing age mates. Such mature language outcomes were not typical of children with profound hearing loss who used hearing aids. Use of a visual (i.e., sign) language system did not provide the linguistic advantage that had been anticipated. Children educated without use of sign exhibited a significant advantage in their use of narratives, the breadth of their vocabulary, in their use of bound morphemes, in the length of their utterances and in the complexity of the syntax used in their spontaneous language. An oral educational focus provided a significant advantage for both spoken and total language skills. This study examined factors affecting children's ability to use and understand the English language. The test battery administered included measures of language comprehension, language production, verbal reasoning, and spoken language production. Language was assessed with both standardized measures and analysis of spontaneously produced language. When results were compared with those of age-matched normal-hearing children, 30% of the children with implants scored within the average range on the receptive language measure and 47% achieved normal levels expressively. Language level was associated with several demographic characteristics as well as implant characteristics. Once these factors were controlled in the analysis, better language outcomes were significantly associated with amount of oral communication emphasis in the classroom.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Language and literacy development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children: successes and challenges
Lederberg, A. R., Schick, B., & Spencer, P. E. (2013) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0029558 · Cited by 441
Predictors of Reading Skill Development in Children with Early Cochlear Implantation
Geers, A. E. (2003) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000051690.43989.5d · Cited by 361
Self-citationEarly Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implantation Benefits
Geers, A. E., Mitchell, C. M., Warner-Czyz, A., Wang, N.-Y., Eisenberg, L. S., & the CDaCI Investigative Team (2017) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3489 · Cited by 322
Self-citationEthnicity, Ethics, and the Deaf-World
Lane, H. (2005) · Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education · doi:10.1093/deafed/eni030 · Cited by 291
Zheng, Z. Z., Munhall, K. G., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2010) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21324 · Cited by 177
Metadata
- Authors
- Geers, A. E., Nicholas, J. G., & Sedey, A. L.
- Venue
- Ear and Hearing
- Published
- 2003-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- Supplement
- Pages
- 46S-58S
- ISSN
- 0196-0202 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2068415541
- Cited by
- 637
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Language Skills of Children with Early Cochlear Implantation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.aud.0000051689.57380.1b
- The paper
- Geers, A. E., Nicholas, J. G., & Sedey, A. L. (2003). Language Skills of Children with Early Cochlear Implantation. Ear and Hearing. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000051689.57380.1b
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.