• 2025 (Vol.39)
  • 1990 (Vol.4)
  • 1989 (Vol.3)
  • 1988 (Vol.2)
  • 1987 (Vol.1)

Volume 39 #1

Contents

  1. MODERN APPROACHES TO COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION IN INNER EAR ANOMALIES: AUDIOLOGICAL ASPECTS
  2. THE ROLE OF THE ENVELOPE IN THE DISCRIMINATION OF RIPPLED SPECTRA BY LISTENERS WITH DIFFERENT AUDITORY SENSITIVITY
  3. INFLUENCE OF ACOUSTIC BACKGROUND ON THE CHOICE OF VISUAL STIMULI BY CHILDREN OF EARLY PRESCHOOL AGE
  4. TEMPORAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEECH IN PATIENTS WITH MODERATELY SEVERE CHRONIC POSTLINGUAL SENSORINEURAL HEARING LOSS WITHOUT THE USE OF HEARING AIDS AND WITH HEARING PROSTHETICS
  5. ON THE ROLE OF THE AUDITORY CRITICAL BANDS IN EFFECTS OF STIMULUS-SPECIFIC ADAPTATION IN THE ACTIVITY OF PRIMARY AUDITORY CORTEX NEURONS IN AWAKE MICE
  6. NICOTINAMIDE-STREPTOZOTOCIN-INDUCED TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS LEADS TO IMPAIRED FUNCTION OF THE MAIN OLFACTORY SYSTEM IN MALE WISTAR RATS
  7. THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECT DETECTION BASED ON L-SHAPE MODEL IN AUTONOMOUS MOTION SYSTEMS

TEMPORAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEECH IN PATIENTS WITH MODERATELY SEVERE CHRONIC POSTLINGUAL SENSORINEURAL HEARING LOSS WITHOUT THE USE OF HEARING AIDS AND WITH HEARING PROSTHETICS

© 2025 K. S. Arutiunian, L. E. Golovanova, L. G. Zajtseva, I. G. Andreeva

I. M. Sechenov Institute of Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry RAS Pr. Torez, 44, Saint-Petersburg, 194223 Russia
Saint-Petersburg Research Institute of Ear, Throat, Nose and Speech, Saint-Petersburg, 190013 Russia
North-Western State Medical University named after I.I.Mechnikov, Saint-Petersburg, 191015 Russia
City Audiology Center of Saint-Petersburg City Gerontology Center, Saint-Petersburg, 190020 Russia

Received 12 Sep 2024

Postlingually deaf patients, unlike those who lost their hearing at an early age, retain previously formed control based on a direct connection between hearing and speech. At the same time, patients with hearing impairment show changes in the speech production compared to those who hear normally, which are caused by a deterioration in the feedback of auditory communication. To what extent the auditory control that is impaired in sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) can be compensated for with hearing aids remains a little-studied question. A study of the effect of restored auditory control on articulatory motor skills with adequate hearing aids has been conducted. A comparison of the durations of stressed vowels and individual words in speech uttered with and without a hearing aid was performed in 12 speakers (6 of them men) with moderately severe chronic SNHL. For stressed vowels [a], [i], [u], which make up the vertices of the vowel triangle for the Russian language, in all positions – the beginning, middle and end of the word, a significant decrease in their duration was revealed when wearing hearing aids compared to speaking without them. In most cases, the duration of stressed vowels varied by about 10%, and the duration of individual words containing such vowels by 5%. A decrease in the duration of stressed vowels and individual words can be an objective indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of auditory prosthetics to restore auditory feedback and normalize speech motor skills.

Key words: audiomotor control, feedback control, speech, voice, sensorineural hearing loss

DOI: 10.31857/S0235009225010044  EDN: UUTRBA

Cite: Arutiunian K. S., Golovanova L. E., Zajtseva L. G., Andreeva I. G. Vremennye kharakteristiki rechi patsientov s postlingvalnoi sensonevralnoi tugoukhostyu iii stepeni bez ispolzovaniya slukhovykh apparatov i pri slukhoprotezirovanii [Temporal characteristics of speech in patients with moderately severe chronic postlingual sensorineural hearing loss without the use of hearing aids and with hearing prosthetics]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2025. V. 39(1). P. 38–45 (in Russian). doi: 10.31857/S0235009225010044

References:

  • Batalin S.V. O dvuh podhodah k opisaniyu dlitel’nostej zvukovyh segmentov v zavisimosti ot ih pozicii vo fraze. Lingua mobilis. 2012. T. 3(36). S. 43–56. (In Russian).
  • Boboshko M.Yu., Riekhakajnen E.I. Rechevaya audiometriya v klinicheskoj praktike. 2019. SPb.: Dialog. (In Russian).
  • Bondarko L.V. Phonetics of the modern russian language. 1998. SPB. S.-Peterburg. Univer. (In Russian).
  • Lunichkin A.M., Andreeva I.G., Zaitseva L.G., Gvozdeva A.P., Ogorodnikova E.A. Changes in the spectral characteristics of vowels in Russian speech on a noise background. Acoustical Physics. 2023. V. 69(3). P. 357–366. DOI: 10.1134/S1063771023600237 (in Russian).
  • Lunichkin A.M., Shtin K.S. Rol’ sluhovoj obratnoj svyazi v kontrole golosa pri normal’nom i snizhennom sluhe. Sensornye sistemy. 2023. T.37 (4). S. 285–300. DOI: 10.31857/S0235009223040042 (In Russian).
  • Shtin K.S., Lunichkin A.M., Gvozdeva A.P., L. Golovanova L.E., Andreeva I.G. Spectral characteristics of cardinal vowels as indicators of the auditory speech feedback control in patients with moderate and moderately severe chronic postlingual sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology. 2023. V.59(4). P. 596-606. DOI: 10.31857/S0869813923040106 (in Russian).
  • Alghamdi N., Maddock S., Marxer R., Barker J., Brown G. J. A corpus of audio-visual Lombard speech with frontal and profile views. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2018. V. 143(6). P. EL523-EL529. DOI: 10.1121/1.5042758.
  • Belz M., Rasskazova O., Krivokapić J., Mooshammer C. Interaction between phrasal structure and vowel tenseness in German: an acoustic and articulatory study. Lang Speech. 2023. V. 66(1). P. 3–34. DOI: 10.1177/00238309211064857.
  • Burnett T. Early pitch-shift response is active in both steady and dynamic voice pitch control. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2002. V. l (12). P. 1058-1063. DOI: 10.1121/1.1487844.
  • Callan D. An auditory-feedback-based neural network model of speech production that is robust to developmental changes in the size and shape of the articulatory system. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 2000. V. 43 (3). P. 721–736. DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4303.721.
  • Calvert D., Silverman S. Speech and deafness: A text for learning and teaching. In: 1st ed. Washington: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf. 1975.
  • Coelho A., Brasolotto A., Bahmad F. Development and validation of the protocol for the evaluation of voice in subjects with hearing impairment. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 2019. V. 86(6). P. 748-762. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2019.05.007.
  • Coelho A., Medved D., Brasolotto A. Hearing loss and Voice. In: Update on Hearing Loss. InTech. 2015. DOI: 10.5772/61217.
  • Das B., Chatterjee I., Kumar S. Laryngeal aerodynamics in children with hearing impairment versus age and height matched normal hearing peers. ISRN Otolaryngology. 2013. DOI: 10.1155/2013/394604.
  • Garnier M., Henrich N., Dubois D. Influence of sound immersion and communicative interaction on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2010. V. 53(3). P. 588-608. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0138).
  • Gautam A., Naples J., Eliades S. Control of speech and voice in cochlear implant patients. Laryngoscope. 2019. V. 129(9). P. 2158–2163. DOI: 10.1002/lary.27787.
  • Gramming P., Sundberg J., Ternström S., Leanderson R., Perkins W. H. Relationship between changes in voice pitch and loudness. Journal of voice. 1988. V. 2 (2). P. 118–126. DOI: 10.1016/S0892-1997(88)80067-5.
  • Guenter F. Neural control of speech. London, England. The MIT Press. 2016. 420 p.
  • Higgins M., Carney A., Schulte L. Physiological assessment of speech and voice production of adults with hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1994. V. 37(3). P. 510–521. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3703.510.
  • Jones J. Perceptual calibration of F0 production: evidence from feedback perturbation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2000. V.108 (3). P. 1246–2151. DOI: 10.1121/1.1288414.
  • Kuk F., Lau C., Korhonen P., Crose B. Speech intelligibility benefits of hearing AIDS at various input levels. Journal of American Academy of Audiology. 2015. V. 26(3). P. 275–288. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.26.3.7.
  • Lee G. Variability in voice fundamental frequency of sustained vowels in speakers with sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Voice. 2012. V. 26(1). P. 24-29. DOI: 10.1016/j. jvoice.2010.10.003.
  • Lee G., Liu C., Lee S. Effects of hearing aid amplification on voice F0 variability in speakers with prelingual hearing loss. Hearing Research. 2013. V. 302. P. 1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2013.04.010.
  • Lee S., Yu J., Fang T., Lee G. Vocal fold nodules: a disorder of phonation organs or auditory feedback? Clinical Otolaryngology. 2019. V. 44(6). P. 975-982. DOI: 10.1111/coa.13417.
  • Liss J., Utianski R., Lansford K. Crosslinguistic application of English-centric rhythm descriptors in motor speech disorders. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2013. V. 65(1). P. 3–19. DOI: 10.1159/000350030.
  • Martony J. Studies on the speech of the deaf. In: 1st ed. Stockholm: Speech Transmission Laboratory. Royal Institute of Technology; 1965.
  • Ngo T., Kubo R., Morikawa D., Akagi M. Acoustical analyses of tendencies of intelligibility in Lombard speech with different background noise levels. Journal of Signal Processing. 2017. V. 21. P. 171-174. DOI: 10.2299/jsp.21.171.
  • Nober E., Nober L. Effects of hearing loss on speech and language in the postbabbling stage. In: Jaffe B, editor. Hearing loss in children. Baltimore: Iniversity Park Press. 1977. P. 630-642.
  • Osberger M. Speech intelligibility in the hearing impaired: Research and clinical implications. In: Intelligibility in Speech Disorders. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 1992. P. 233-264.
  • Osberger M., McGarr N. Speech production characteristics of the hearing impaired. In: Lass N, editor. Speech and Language: Advances In Basic Science and Research. New York: Academic Press. 1982.
  • Patel R., Schell K. The influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2008. V. 51. P. 209–220 DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/016).
  • Perkell J. The sensorimotor control of speech production. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium of Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human Function. Hokkaido University. Japan, Sapporo. 2001. P. 359-365.
  • Schenk B., Baumgartner W., Hamzavi J. Changes in vowel quality after cochlear implantation. ORL: journal for otorhinolaryngolists and its related specialties. 2003. V. 65(3). P. 184–188. DOI: 10.1159/000072257.
  • Schenk B., Baumgartner W., Hamzavi J. Effect of the loss of auditory feedback on segmental parameters of vowels of postlingually deafened speakers. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2003. V. 30(4). P. 333-339. DOI: 10.1016/s0385-8146(03)00093-2.
  • Selleck M., Sataloff R. The impact of the auditory system on phonation: a review. Journal of Voice. 2014. V. 28(6). P. 688–693. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.03.018.
  • Sivasankar M. Voice responses to change in pitch of voice or tone auditory feedback. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2005. V. l17 (2). P. 850-1857. DOI: 10.1121/1.1849933.
  • Stevens K., Nickerson R., Rollins A. Assessment of nasalization in the speech of deaf children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1976. V. 19(2). P. 393-416. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.1902.393.
  • Stowe L., Lauren M., Edward J. Evidence that the Lombard effect is frequency-specific in humans. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2013. V. 134 (1). P. 640-647. DOI: 10.1121/1.4807645.
  • Subtelny J., Whitehead R., Samar V. Spectral study of deviant resonance in the speech of woman who are deaf. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1992. V. 35. P. 574–579. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3503.574.
  • Szkiełkowska A., Myszel K. Acoustic voice parameters in hearing-impaired, school-aged children. Research study outcomes. Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. 2021. V. 3(3). DOI: 10.31579/2692-9562/034.
  • Villacorta V. Sensorimotor adaptation to feedback perturbations of vowel acoustics and its relation to perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2007. V. 122 (4). P. 2306-2319. DOI: 10.1121/1.2773966.