The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: A novel word learning (NWL) paradigm was used to explore underlying phonological and cognitive mechanisms responsible for delayed vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants (CIs). METHODS: One hundred and one children using CIs, 6-12 years old, were tested along with 47 children with normal hearing (NH). Tests of NWL, receptive vocabulary, and speech perception at 2 loudness levels were administered to children with CIs. Those with NH completed the NWL task and a receptive vocabulary test. CI participants with good audibility (GA) versus poor audibility (PA) were compared on all measures. Analysis of variance was used to compare performance across the children with NH and the two groups of children with CIs. Multiple regression analysis was employed to identify independent predictors of vocabulary outcomes. RESULTS: Children with CIs in the GA group scored higher in receptive vocabulary and NWL than children in the PA group, although they did not reach NH levels. CI-aided pure tone threshold and performance on the NWL task predicted independent variance in vocabulary after accounting for other known predictors. DISCUSSION: Acquiring spoken vocabulary is facilitated by GA with a CI and phonological learning and memory skills. Children with CIs did not learn novel words at the same rate or achieve the same receptive vocabulary levels as their NH peers. Maximizing audibility for the perception of speech and direct instruction of new vocabulary may be necessary for children with CIs to reach levels seen in peers with NH.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Unlike spoken languages, which may be partly or fully inaccessible to the deaf baby, sign languages are completely accessible.
“Unlike spoken languages, which may be partly or fully inaccessible to the deaf baby, sign languages are completely accessible [24,25,108].”
From Support for parents of deaf children: Common questions and informed, evidence-based answers (2019) · cites this paper as [108]
The Results (Audibility and speech perception; page not provided) show that children with cochlear implants had difficulty hearing soft speech, supporting the point that spoken language may be less accessible with hearing loss. The paper studies school-aged children, not deaf babies, and does not say that sign languages are completely accessible. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 79
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Mueller JG Killion MC An easy method for calculating the articulation index Hearing Journal 1990 43 14 17
- Authors
- Davidson, L. S., Geers, A. E., & Nicholas, J. G.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- The University of Texas at Dallas (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nicholas, Johanna G
- Venue
- Cochlear Implants International
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-11-25
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 211-221
- ISSN
- 1467-0100 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-7628
- PMC
- PMC3938995
- OpenAlex
- W1998345325
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Cochlear Implants International (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (K23DC008294, R01DC004168)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Hearing Impairment and Communication
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Keywords
- cochlear implants, novel word learning, vocabulary acquisition, audibility, speech perception, receptive vocabulary, phonological learning, phonological memory, children, pure-tone thresholds, hearing loss
- MeSH terms
- Auditory Threshold, Child, Child Language, Cochlear Implants, Deafness, Female, Humans, Language Development, Language Tests, Male, Phonetics, Speech, Speech Perception, Verbal Learning, Vocabulary, Cochlear Implantation
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
