3 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Speechreading ability is related to phonological awareness and single-word reading in both deaf and hearing children
Purpose. Speechreading (lipreading) is a correlate of reading ability in both deaf and hearing children. We investigated whether the relationship between speechreading and single-word reading is mediated by phonological awareness in deaf and hearing children.
Method. In two separate studies, 66 deaf children and 138 hearing children, aged 5–8 years old, were assessed on measures of speechreading, phonological awareness, and single-word reading. We assessed the concurrent relationships between latent variables measuring speechreading, phonological awareness, and single-word reading.
Results. In both deaf and hearing children, there was a strong relationship between speechreading and single-word reading, which was fully mediated by phonological awareness.
Conclusions. These results are consistent with ideas from previous studies that visual speech information contributes to the development of phonological representations in both deaf and hearing children, which, in turn, support learning to read. Future longitudinal and training studies are required to establish whether these relationships reflect causal effects
Recommended from our members
Computerised speechreading training for deaf children: A randomised controlled trial
Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomised controlled triala computerised speechreading training programme to determine a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills.Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationshipmay be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging.
Method: Sixty-six deaf 5-7 year olds were randomised into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training programme was comprised of10 minutesessionsa day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, 3 months and 10 months after training.
Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations, however these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen toword reading.
Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy programme. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children
Computerized speechreading training for deaf children: A randomised controlled trial
Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomised controlled trial a computerised speechreading training programme to determine a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills. Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationship may be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging. Method: Sixty-six deaf 5-7 year olds were randomised into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training programme was comprised of 10 minute sessions a day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, 3 months and 10 months after training.
Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations, however these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen to word reading. Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy programme. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children