Reevaluating Order Effects in the Binaural Bithermal Caloric Test

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant order effect exists in the binaural bithermal caloric test.

Method

Fifteen volunteers (mean age = 24.3 years, range = 18–38 years) with no history of vestibular disorder, hearing loss, concussion, or neurological disease underwent caloric testing on 3 occasions. Irrigations were randomized using 8 possible order combinations. The parameters of interest included unilateral weakness, directional preponderance, total response from the right ear, and total response from the left ear.

Results

Order effects were analyzed using 2 methods. The first analysis was done looking at the 8 possible orders. We also had an a priori established hypothesis that the first irrigation tested would influence the calculation of unilateral weakness more than the other 3 irrigations. To test this hypothesis, the 8 orders were condensed into 4 order conditions based on the first irrigation. The effect of order was determined using analysis of variance tests. Although the first irrigation tended to be the largest, no significant effects were observed.

Conclusions

This experiment demonstrated that while there is great inter-individual and intra-individual variability in caloric test results, the order of irrigations had no significant effect in the test. Future studies may explore the effects of nonphysiological factors on test results.

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2DMVRbf
via IFTTT

Reevaluating Order Effects in the Binaural Bithermal Caloric Test

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant order effect exists in the binaural bithermal caloric test.

Method

Fifteen volunteers (mean age = 24.3 years, range = 18–38 years) with no history of vestibular disorder, hearing loss, concussion, or neurological disease underwent caloric testing on 3 occasions. Irrigations were randomized using 8 possible order combinations. The parameters of interest included unilateral weakness, directional preponderance, total response from the right ear, and total response from the left ear.

Results

Order effects were analyzed using 2 methods. The first analysis was done looking at the 8 possible orders. We also had an a priori established hypothesis that the first irrigation tested would influence the calculation of unilateral weakness more than the other 3 irrigations. To test this hypothesis, the 8 orders were condensed into 4 order conditions based on the first irrigation. The effect of order was determined using analysis of variance tests. Although the first irrigation tended to be the largest, no significant effects were observed.

Conclusions

This experiment demonstrated that while there is great inter-individual and intra-individual variability in caloric test results, the order of irrigations had no significant effect in the test. Future studies may explore the effects of nonphysiological factors on test results.

from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2DMVRbf
via IFTTT

Reevaluating Order Effects in the Binaural Bithermal Caloric Test

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant order effect exists in the binaural bithermal caloric test.

Method

Fifteen volunteers (mean age = 24.3 years, range = 18–38 years) with no history of vestibular disorder, hearing loss, concussion, or neurological disease underwent caloric testing on 3 occasions. Irrigations were randomized using 8 possible order combinations. The parameters of interest included unilateral weakness, directional preponderance, total response from the right ear, and total response from the left ear.

Results

Order effects were analyzed using 2 methods. The first analysis was done looking at the 8 possible orders. We also had an a priori established hypothesis that the first irrigation tested would influence the calculation of unilateral weakness more than the other 3 irrigations. To test this hypothesis, the 8 orders were condensed into 4 order conditions based on the first irrigation. The effect of order was determined using analysis of variance tests. Although the first irrigation tended to be the largest, no significant effects were observed.

Conclusions

This experiment demonstrated that while there is great inter-individual and intra-individual variability in caloric test results, the order of irrigations had no significant effect in the test. Future studies may explore the effects of nonphysiological factors on test results.

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2DMVRbf
via IFTTT

Performance on Auditory and Visual Tasks of Inhibition in English Monolingual and Spanish–English Bilingual Adults: Do Bilinguals Have a Cognitive Advantage?

Purpose

Bilingual individuals have been shown to be more proficient on visual tasks of inhibition compared with their monolingual counterparts. However, the bilingual advantage has not been evidenced in all studies, and very little is known regarding how bilingualism influences inhibitory control in the perception of auditory information. The purpose of the current study was to examine inhibition of irrelevant information using auditory and visual tasks in English monolingual and Spanish–English bilingual adults.

Method

Twenty English monolinguals and 19 early balanced Spanish–English bilinguals participated in this study. All participants were 18–30 years of age, had hearing thresholds < 25 dB HL from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally (American National Standards Institute, 2003), and were right handed. Inhibition was measured using a forced-attention dichotic consonant–vowel listening task and the Simon task, a nonverbal visual test.

Results

Both groups of participants demonstrated a significant right ear advantage on the dichotic listening task; however, no significant differences in performance were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual groups in any of the dichotic listening conditions. Both groups performed better on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial of the Simon task and had significantly faster response times on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial. However, there were no significant differences in performance between the monolingual and bilingual groups on the visual test of inhibition.

Conclusions

No significant differences in performance on auditory and visual tests of inhibition of irrelevant information were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual participants in this study. These findings suggest that bilinguals may not exhibit an advantage in the inhibition of irrelevant information compared with monolinguals.

from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EqRoMH
via IFTTT

Performance on Auditory and Visual Tasks of Inhibition in English Monolingual and Spanish–English Bilingual Adults: Do Bilinguals Have a Cognitive Advantage?

Purpose

Bilingual individuals have been shown to be more proficient on visual tasks of inhibition compared with their monolingual counterparts. However, the bilingual advantage has not been evidenced in all studies, and very little is known regarding how bilingualism influences inhibitory control in the perception of auditory information. The purpose of the current study was to examine inhibition of irrelevant information using auditory and visual tasks in English monolingual and Spanish–English bilingual adults.

Method

Twenty English monolinguals and 19 early balanced Spanish–English bilinguals participated in this study. All participants were 18–30 years of age, had hearing thresholds < 25 dB HL from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally (American National Standards Institute, 2003), and were right handed. Inhibition was measured using a forced-attention dichotic consonant–vowel listening task and the Simon task, a nonverbal visual test.

Results

Both groups of participants demonstrated a significant right ear advantage on the dichotic listening task; however, no significant differences in performance were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual groups in any of the dichotic listening conditions. Both groups performed better on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial of the Simon task and had significantly faster response times on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial. However, there were no significant differences in performance between the monolingual and bilingual groups on the visual test of inhibition.

Conclusions

No significant differences in performance on auditory and visual tests of inhibition of irrelevant information were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual participants in this study. These findings suggest that bilinguals may not exhibit an advantage in the inhibition of irrelevant information compared with monolinguals.

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EqRoMH
via IFTTT

Performance on Auditory and Visual Tasks of Inhibition in English Monolingual and Spanish–English Bilingual Adults: Do Bilinguals Have a Cognitive Advantage?

Purpose

Bilingual individuals have been shown to be more proficient on visual tasks of inhibition compared with their monolingual counterparts. However, the bilingual advantage has not been evidenced in all studies, and very little is known regarding how bilingualism influences inhibitory control in the perception of auditory information. The purpose of the current study was to examine inhibition of irrelevant information using auditory and visual tasks in English monolingual and Spanish–English bilingual adults.

Method

Twenty English monolinguals and 19 early balanced Spanish–English bilinguals participated in this study. All participants were 18–30 years of age, had hearing thresholds < 25 dB HL from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally (American National Standards Institute, 2003), and were right handed. Inhibition was measured using a forced-attention dichotic consonant–vowel listening task and the Simon task, a nonverbal visual test.

Results

Both groups of participants demonstrated a significant right ear advantage on the dichotic listening task; however, no significant differences in performance were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual groups in any of the dichotic listening conditions. Both groups performed better on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial of the Simon task and had significantly faster response times on the congruent trial than on the incongruent trial. However, there were no significant differences in performance between the monolingual and bilingual groups on the visual test of inhibition.

Conclusions

No significant differences in performance on auditory and visual tests of inhibition of irrelevant information were evidenced between the monolingual and bilingual participants in this study. These findings suggest that bilinguals may not exhibit an advantage in the inhibition of irrelevant information compared with monolinguals.

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EqRoMH
via IFTTT

Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants Learn Words Faster

A recently published study, "Establishing a mental lexicon with cochlear implants: an ERP study with young children," conducted by researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (MPI CBS) in Leipzig and the University Medical Centre Dresden, reported that hearing-impaired children with cochlear implants (CI) pick up words faster compared with normal-hearing children. The study aimed to examine the lexical-semantic development of profoundly hearing-impaired and deaf children with CI using the N400 effect, which is an event-related potential (ERP) that reflects semantic processing, as its marker.

The study briefly explains that natural hearing is different from hearing through CI: the implant yields only limited frequency discrimination and dynamic range resulting in more hearing difficulty in hearing especially in noisy environments. The research points out that—especially in cases of children with congenital or acquired sensorineural deafness— infants' brains develop without any auditory input for a considerable amount of time. This means that even with implantation at about 12 months, which is considered as early implantation, congenitally hearing-impaired children will only have their first auditory input experience at a time when children with normal hearing will already have explored language to an extent that allows them to produce their first words.

Test subjects were 36 hearing-impaired children with bilateral CIs. However, due to excessive artefacts, six were excluded from further analysis. 13 subjects had severe hearing loss with some residual hearing prior to implantation; the remaining 19 had congenital bilateral deafness. Following their cochlear implantation, the children underwent a rehabilitation program where they received bimonthly fitting of the speech processor and multidisciplinary speech and language therapy for up to three years. Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings were performed 12, 18 and 24 months after first implant activation.

Niki Vavatzanidis, one of the authors of the research, in a press release from Max Planck Institute, said "We observed that when deaf children get their implants, they learn words faster than those with normal hearing. Consequently, they build up certain word pools faster."  Study leader Angela D. Friederici, head of MPI CBS, further explained that "children with cochlear implants could help us understand the general processes of language acquisition and determine which single steps are age-dependent."

Published: 1/30/2018 8:38:00 AM

from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EpuMwg
via IFTTT

Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants Learn Words Faster

A recently published study, "Establishing a mental lexicon with cochlear implants: an ERP study with young children," conducted by researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (MPI CBS) in Leipzig and the University Medical Centre Dresden, reported that hearing-impaired children with cochlear implants (CI) pick up words faster compared with normal-hearing children. The study aimed to examine the lexical-semantic development of profoundly hearing-impaired and deaf children with CI using the N400 effect, which is an event-related potential (ERP) that reflects semantic processing, as its marker.

The study briefly explains that natural hearing is different from hearing through CI: the implant yields only limited frequency discrimination and dynamic range resulting in more hearing difficulty in hearing especially in noisy environments. The research points out that—especially in cases of children with congenital or acquired sensorineural deafness— infants' brains develop without any auditory input for a considerable amount of time. This means that even with implantation at about 12 months, which is considered as early implantation, congenitally hearing-impaired children will only have their first auditory input experience at a time when children with normal hearing will already have explored language to an extent that allows them to produce their first words.

Test subjects were 36 hearing-impaired children with bilateral CIs. However, due to excessive artefacts, six were excluded from further analysis. 13 subjects had severe hearing loss with some residual hearing prior to implantation; the remaining 19 had congenital bilateral deafness. Following their cochlear implantation, the children underwent a rehabilitation program where they received bimonthly fitting of the speech processor and multidisciplinary speech and language therapy for up to three years. Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings were performed 12, 18 and 24 months after first implant activation.

Niki Vavatzanidis, one of the authors of the research, in a press release from Max Planck Institute, said "We observed that when deaf children get their implants, they learn words faster than those with normal hearing. Consequently, they build up certain word pools faster."  Study leader Angela D. Friederici, head of MPI CBS, further explained that "children with cochlear implants could help us understand the general processes of language acquisition and determine which single steps are age-dependent."

Published: 1/30/2018 8:38:00 AM

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EpuMwg
via IFTTT

Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants Learn Words Faster

A recently published study, "Establishing a mental lexicon with cochlear implants: an ERP study with young children," conducted by researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (MPI CBS) in Leipzig and the University Medical Centre Dresden, reported that hearing-impaired children with cochlear implants (CI) pick up words faster compared with normal-hearing children. The study aimed to examine the lexical-semantic development of profoundly hearing-impaired and deaf children with CI using the N400 effect, which is an event-related potential (ERP) that reflects semantic processing, as its marker.

The study briefly explains that natural hearing is different from hearing through CI: the implant yields only limited frequency discrimination and dynamic range resulting in more hearing difficulty in hearing especially in noisy environments. The research points out that—especially in cases of children with congenital or acquired sensorineural deafness— infants' brains develop without any auditory input for a considerable amount of time. This means that even with implantation at about 12 months, which is considered as early implantation, congenitally hearing-impaired children will only have their first auditory input experience at a time when children with normal hearing will already have explored language to an extent that allows them to produce their first words.

Test subjects were 36 hearing-impaired children with bilateral CIs. However, due to excessive artefacts, six were excluded from further analysis. 13 subjects had severe hearing loss with some residual hearing prior to implantation; the remaining 19 had congenital bilateral deafness. Following their cochlear implantation, the children underwent a rehabilitation program where they received bimonthly fitting of the speech processor and multidisciplinary speech and language therapy for up to three years. Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings were performed 12, 18 and 24 months after first implant activation.

Niki Vavatzanidis, one of the authors of the research, in a press release from Max Planck Institute, said "We observed that when deaf children get their implants, they learn words faster than those with normal hearing. Consequently, they build up certain word pools faster."  Study leader Angela D. Friederici, head of MPI CBS, further explained that "children with cochlear implants could help us understand the general processes of language acquisition and determine which single steps are age-dependent."

Published: 1/30/2018 8:38:00 AM

from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2EpuMwg
via IFTTT