Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Effect of Simultaneous Bilingualism on Speech Intelligibility across Different Masker Types, Modalities, and Signal-to-Noise Ratios in School-Age Children.

Rachel Reetzke, Boji Pak-Wing Lam, Zilong Xie and 2 more

PLoS ONE · 2016

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0168048 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

Recognizing speech in adverse listening conditions is a significant cognitive, perceptual, and linguistic challenge, especially for children. Prior studies have yielded mixed results on the impact of bilingualism on speech perception in noise. Methodological variations across studies make it difficult to converge on a conclusion regarding the effect of bilingualism on speech-in-noise performance. Moreover, there is a dearth of speech-in-noise evidence for bilingual children who learn two languages simultaneously. The aim of the present study was to examine the extent to which various adverse listening conditions modulate differences in speech-in-noise performance between monolingual and simultaneous bilingual children. To that end, sentence recognition was assessed in twenty-four school-aged children (12 monolinguals; 12 simultaneous bilinguals, age of English acquisition ≤ 3 yrs.). We implemented a comprehensive speech-in-noise battery to examine recognition of English sentences across different modalities (audio-only, audiovisual), masker types (steady-state pink noise, two-talker babble), and a range of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs; 0 to -16 dB). Results revealed no difference in performance between monolingual and simultaneous bilingual children across each combination of modality, masker, and SNR. Our findings suggest that when English age of acquisition and socioeconomic status is similar between groups, monolingual and bilingual children exhibit comparable speech-in-noise performance across a range of conditions analogous to everyday listening environments.

Abstract licence: CC BY

References93

    40 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

    All 93 references

    Reads

    Read by people on this page

    None yet.

    Checked or read by AI through naulon

    None yet.

    A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

    Are you an author?

    Is this your paper?

    Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.