This study investigates the production of voiceless alveolar and postalveolar fricatives and affricates by bilingual and monolingual children with hearing loss who use cochlear implants (CIs) and their peers with normal hearing (NH).
Fifty-four children participated in our study, including 12 Spanish-English bilingual CI users (M = 6;0 [years;months]), 12 monolingual English-speaking children with CIs (M = 6;1), 20 bilingual children with NH (M = 6;5), and 10 monolingual English-speaking children with NH (M = 5;10). Picture elicitation targeting /s/, /tʃ/, and /ʃ/ was administered. Repeated-measures analyses of variance comparing group means for frication duration, rise time, and centroid frequency were conducted for the effects of CI use and bilingualism.
All groups distinguished the target sounds in the 3 acoustic parameters examined. Regarding frication duration and rise time, the Spanish productions of bilingual children with CIs differed from their bilingual peers with NH. English frication duration patterns for bilingual versus monolingual CI users also differed. Centroid frequency was a stronger place cue for children with NH than for children with CIs.
Patterns of fricative and affricate production display effects of bilingualism and diminished signal, yielding unique patterns for bilingual and monolingual CI users.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#28,485,094
of 34,259,606 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research
#3,797
of 4,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,403
of 356,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research
#63
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,259,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 356,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
