English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Although reducing visual input to emphasize auditory cues is a common practice in pediatric auditory (re)habilitation, the extant literature offers minimal empirical evidence for whether unisensory auditory-only (AO) or multisensory audiovisual (AV) input is more beneficial to children with hearing loss for developing spoken language skills. Using an adapted alternating treatments single case research design, we evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of a receptive word learning intervention with and without access to visual speechreading cues. Four preschool children with prelingual hearing loss participated. Based on probes without visual cues, three participants demonstrated strong evidence for learning in the AO and AV conditions relative to a control (no-teaching) condition. No participants demonstrated a differential rate of learning between AO and AV conditions. Neither an inhibitory effect predicted by a unisensory theory nor a beneficial effect predicted by a multisensory theory for providing visual cues was identified. Clinical implications are discussed.

Comparing Auditory-Only and Audiovisual Word Learning for Children With Hearing Loss