Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing in children with dyslexia?

Citation
S. Rosen et E. Manganari, Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing in children with dyslexia?, J SPEECH L, 44(4), 2001, pp. 720-736
Citations number
36
Categorie Soggetti
Rehabilitation
Journal title
JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH
ISSN journal
10924388 → ACNP
Volume
44
Issue
4
Year of publication
2001
Pages
720 - 736
Database
ISI
SICI code
1092-4388(200108)44:4<720:ITARBS>2.0.ZU;2-J
Abstract
A group of 8 young teenagers with dyslexia were compared to age-matched con trol participants on a number of speech and nonspeech auditory tasks. There were no differences between the control participants and the teenagers wit h dyslexia in forward and simultaneous masking, nor were there any differen ces in frequency selectivity as indexed by performance with a bandstop nois e. Thresholds for backward masking in a broadband noise were elevated for t he teenagers with dyslexia as a group. If this deficit in backward masking had an influence on speech perception, we might expect the perception of "b a" versus "da" to be affected, as the crucial second formant transition is followed by a vowel. On the other hand, as forward masking is not different in the two groups, we would expect the perception of "ab" versus "ad" to b e unaffected, as the contrastive second. formant transition is preceded by a vowel. Overall speech identification and discrimination performance for t hese two contrasts was superior for the control group but did not differ ot herwise. Thus, the clear group deficit in backward masking in the group wit h dyslexia has no simple relationship to the perception of crucial acoustic features in speech. Furthermore, the deficit for nonspeech analogues of th e speech contrasts (second formants in isolation) was much; less marked tha n for the speech sounds, with 75% of the listeners with dyslexia performing equivalently to control listeners. The auditory deficit cannot therefore, be simply characterized as a difficulty in processing rapid auditory inform ation. Either there is a linguistic/phonological component to the speech pe rception deficit, or there is an important effect of acoustic complexity.