↓ Skip to main content

Auditory and Visual Electrophysiology of Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants: Implications for Cross-modal Plasticity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Auditory and Visual Electrophysiology of Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants: Implications for Cross-modal Plasticity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00059
Pubmed ID
Authors

David P. Corina, Shane Blau, Todd LaMarr, Laurel A. Lawyer, Sharon Coffey-Corina

Abstract

Deaf children who receive a cochlear implant early in life and engage in intensive oral/aural therapy often make great strides in spoken language acquisition. However, despite clinicians' best efforts, there is a great deal of variability in language outcomes. One concern is that cortical regions which normally support auditory processing may become reorganized for visual function, leaving fewer available resources for auditory language acquisition. The conditions under which these changes occur are not well understood, but we may begin investigating this phenomenon by looking for interactions between auditory and visual evoked cortical potentials in deaf children. If children with abnormal auditory responses show increased sensitivity to visual stimuli, this may indicate the presence of maladaptive cortical plasticity. We recorded evoked potentials, using both auditory and visual paradigms, from 25 typical hearing children and 26 deaf children (ages 2-8 years) with cochlear implants. An auditory oddball paradigm was used (85% /ba/ syllables vs. 15% frequency modulated tone sweeps) to elicit an auditory P1 component. Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) were recorded during presentation of an intermittent peripheral radial checkerboard while children watched a silent cartoon, eliciting a P1-N1 response. We observed reduced auditory P1 amplitudes and a lack of latency shift associated with normative aging in our deaf sample. We also observed shorter latencies in N1 VEPs to visual stimulus offset in deaf participants. While these data demonstrate cortical changes associated with auditory deprivation, we did not find evidence for a relationship between cortical auditory evoked potentials and the VEPs. This is consistent with descriptions of intra-modal plasticity within visual systems of deaf children, but do not provide evidence for cross-modal plasticity. In addition, we note that sign language experience had no effect on deaf children's early auditory and visual ERP responses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 20%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 5 6%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 15 18%
Psychology 11 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Linguistics 5 6%
Engineering 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#2,499,986
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,902
of 31,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,902
of 423,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#115
of 459 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 423,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 459 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.