Typical consonant cluster acquisition in auditory-verbal children with early-identified severe/profound hearing loss

Figures & data

Figure 1. Process of exclusion for participants. HL, Hearing Loss; S/P, Severe/Profound; M, male; F, female; AV, auditory-verbal; y, years. Framework based on format proposed by Van Kleeck, Schwarz, Fey, Kaiser, Miller, & Weitzman (2010) and Boutron, Moher, Altman, Schulz, Ravaud, & for the, C. G. (2008). ^aDegree of hearing impairment based on Clark (1981): Severe/Profound > 65 dB SPL bilaterally. ^bEight children were assessed at 3 and 4 years, with four children assessed at both 3 and 4 years.

Table I. Demographics and characteristics of participants.

Child^a	Sex	Degree HL^b	Age at diagnosis (weeks)	Age at HA fitting (months)	Age CI #1 switch-on (months)	Age CI #2 switch-on (months)	Bilateral aided threshold range (dBHL)	Ages at testing (years)	Family SES^c	Maternal education level
Christina	F	Prof	2	1	12	24	20–25	3 & 4	Middle	High school graduate
Alana	F	Sev/prof	4	2	18	34	20–25	3 & 4	Middle	College graduate
Mark	M	Prof	2	1.5	6	16	15–25	3 & 4	Middle	Some college
Winslow	M	Sev/prof	2	1	N/A	N/A	20–25	3 & 4	Lower middle	High school graduate
Sondra	F	Prof	1	1	6	28	15–25	3	Middle	Some college
Felix	M	Prof	6	3	10	27	20–25	3	Middle	Some college
Alistair	M	Prof	2	1	7	16	20–25	3	Middle	High school graduate
Kalen	M	Prof	4	2	7	29	20–25	3	Middle	College graduate
Rigby	M	Prof	12	4	12	32	20–25	4	Middle	College graduate
Paddy	M	Prof	2	1	9	48	15–25	4	Middle	High school graduate
Edwin	M	Prof	12	4	12	42	20–25	4	Middle	College graduate
Aden	M	Sev/prof	4	2	18	N/A	15–25	4	Middle	High school graduate

CI, Nucleus Freedom processor with ACE programming strategy; N/A, not applicable.

^aPseudonyms were used for all chidren's names.

^bDegree of hearing loss based on Clark (1981): Mild ≤ 40 dB; Moderate = ˜ 40–64 dB; Severe/Profound = 65–90 dB; Profound > 91 dB.

^cSES/socio economic status based on Beveridge A, Weber S. Income, education and occupation data analysis of 2000 and 2003 (Beveridge & Weber, 2003).

Table II. Percentage consonant clusters correct (PCCC) and phonological processes affecting production in single words (SW)^a and PCCC in conversation.

	PCCC at 3 years Cluster Test_ SW			PCCC at 4 years Cluster Test_ SW			% Phonological processes affecting CC production at 3 years Cluster Test_ SW			% Phonological processes affecting CC production at 4 years Cluster Test_ SW			PCCC at 3 years Conversation			PCCC at 4 years Conversation
Participant	Initial	Final	Total	Initial	Final	Total	% CR	% CS	% CD	% CR	% CS	% CD	Initial	Final	Total	Initial	Final	Total
Christina	57	83	67	89	88	90	9.7	23.6	0	0	11.1	0	25	67	46	79	86	81
Alana	71	72	74	61	100	70	15.3	18.1	0	2.8	26.4	0	53	91	72	58	84	74
Mark	85	95	89	94	100	96	5.6	6.9	0	0	4.2	0	85	87	85	81	100	94
Winslow	51	76	61	98	100	98	11.1	23.6	1.4	0	1.4	0	54	75	62	96	91	91
Sondra	71	87	75	–	–	NA	2.8	25	0	NA	NA	NA	82	81	77	–	–	NA
Felix	46	80	58	–	–	NA	30.6	8.3	0	NA	NA	NA	74	68	71	–	–	NA
Alistair	62	90	69	–	–	NA	5.6	25	0	NA	NA	NA	63	94	72	–	–	NA
Kalen	51	78	60	–	–	NA	12.5	25	0	NA	NA	NA	51	69	57	–	–	NA
Rigby	–	–	NA	80	100	86	NA	NA	NA	4.2	11.1	0	–	–	NA	70	91	70
Paddy			NA	75	100	84	NA	NA	NA	5.6	8.3	0	–	–	NA	69	76	75
Edwin			NA	75	82	79	NA	NA	NA	4.2	12.5	1.4	–	–	NA	81	77	80
Aden			NA	84	100	89	NA	NA	NA	4.2	5.6	0	–	–	NA	95	100	99
Mean	61.75	82.63	69.13	82.00	96.25	86.50							60.88	79.00	67.75	78.63	88.13	83.00
SD	13.17	7.67	10.22	11.93	7.13	9.07							19.64	10.81	12.26	12.95	9.19	10.47

SD, standard deviation; % CR, % Cluster Reduction; % CS, % Cluster Simplification; % CD, % Cluster Deletion.

Note: All children have been de-identified with pseudonyms replacing actual names.

^aSW scores based on Single-Word Test of Consonant Clusters Test (McLeod & Hand, 1991).

Table III. Number of consonant clusters in participants’ independent and relational consonant cluster inventories in single-words.^a

Single word sampling Child	Number of initial consonant clusters (total possible = 27)				Number of final consonant clusters (total possible = 10)
	3 years		4 years		3 years		4 years
	Independent	Relational	Independent	Relational	Independent	Relational	Independent	Relational
Christina	24 (3)^b	20 (1)	27 (3)	26	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)
Alana	26 (4)	23 (1)	22 (1)	21 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (1)	10 (0)
Mark	26 (2)	26 (0)	26 (0)	26 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (0)
Winslow	20 (5)	18 (2)	27 (0)	27 (0)	9 (0)	9 (0)	9 (0)	9 (0)
Sondra	24 (3)	21 (1)			9 (0)	9 (0)
Felix	15 (6)	15 (3)			7 (0)	7 (0)
Alistair	26 (4)	23 (1)			8 (0)	8 (0)
Kalen	18 (5)	17 (0)			10 (0)	10 (0)
Rigby			25 (3)	25 (0)			9 (0)	9 (0)
Paddy			24 (2)	24 (0)			10 (0)	10 (0)
Edwin			22 (3)	20 (2)			9 (0)	9 (0)
Aden			24 (2)	24 (1)			11 (0)	11 (0)

Note: All children have been de-identified, with pseudonyms replacing actual names.

^aSW scores based on Single-Word Test of Consonant Clusters Test (McLeod & Hand, 1991).

^b(..) = number of marginal clusters.

Table IV. Number of initial and final consonant clusters, including phonetically complex morphophonemes in relational inventories in conversational speech.

Conversation Child	Number of consonant clusters in relational inventories				Phonetically complex morphophonemes
	3 years		4 years		Number/proportion of morphophonemic markers		Morphophonemic cluster markers
	Initial	Final	Initial	Final	3 years	4 years	3 years	4 years
Christina	10	9	19	15	4/9; 44%	9/15; 60%	ʃt lz nʤ pz ts	ʃt ks lp ls lz ns pt pz ts
Alana	7	13	15	18	8/13; 62%	11/18; 61%	dz ks lp lz ps ts kst nts	dz fs ks lz mz ns nz ps ts vz nts
Mark	13	13	8	6	8/13; 62%	3/6; 50%	ʃt dz ks lz ts mpd nts snt	ʧd ks ts
Winslow	10	12	19	18	6/12; 50%	11/18; 61%	ʃt ls lz pz ts ksd	ʃt dz ft gz ks lz nz ps pz ts nts
Sondra	15	10			7/10; 70%		ks lz md nz ps ts nts
Felix	6	10			7/10; 70%		ld lz ns nt pt ts nts
Alistair	5	6			3/6; 50%		lp lz ts
Kalen	10	6			4/6; 67%		ks lz ts nts
Rigby			15 (1)	10 (1)		6/10; 60%		ks nt ps pz ts nts
Paddy			16 (0)	12 (1)		9/12; 75%		dz ls lz nt nz pt pz ts nts
Edwin			8 (5)	13 (2)		8/13; 62%		ks kt ld lz pt pz ts tz
Aden			17 (0)	19 (0)		13/19; 68%		ðz ʃt ft ks ls lz mz nt nz pz ts vz nts

Note: All children have been de-identified, with pseudonyms replacing actual names.

Table V. Percentage correct responses for initial and final consonant clusters for children in the current study and Smit et al. (1990) at 3- and 4-years-of-age.^a,b

Consonant cluster	Current data^c 3 years (n = 8) F+ M	Smit et al. (1990) 3 years (n = 47)		Current data^c 4 years (n = 8) F+ M	Smit et al. (1990) 4 years (n = 91)
		F	M		F	M
bl-	62.5	50	28	100*^#	76	56
bɹ-	75*	34	28	100*^#	62	52
dɹ-	100*^#	45	16	100*^#	65	56
fl-	87.5*	36	16	87.5*	73	52
fɹ-	100*^#	14	24	75*	65	59
gl-	37.5	41	20	62.5	70	52
ɡɹ-	62.5	36	24	75*	65	46
kl-	62.5	41	24	100*^#	77	55
kɹ-	62.5	27	20	87.5*	65	50
kw-	100*^#	68	52	100*^#	97	87
pl-	75*	50	24	87.5*	76	52
pɹ-	75*	23	20	100*^#	70	50
sk-	87.5*	41	24	87.5*	62	59
sl-	87.5*	41	12	100*^#	62	39
sm-	100*^#	36	24	100*^#	59	59
sn-	87.5*	34	20	100*^#	58	61
sp-	100*^#	45	28	100*^#	62	63
st-	100*^#	55	24	100*^#	62	57
sw-	100*^#	45	28	100*^#	54	63
tɹ-	100*^#	32	24	100*^#	70	48
tw-	87.5*	59	56	100*^#	92	83
θɹ-	37.5	23	8	50	46	22
skɹ-	50	23	8	100*^#	46	30
skw-	100*^#	32	20	100*^#	59	59
spl-	37.5	23	12	87.5*	57	37
spɹ-	75*	14	12	100*^#	46	31
stɹ-	75*	32	8	100*^#	46	30
-ŋk	100*^#	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-dz	62.5	NA	NA	87.5*	NA	NA
-mp	100*^#	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-nʧ	100*^#	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-nʤ	87.5*	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-nd	87.5*	NA	NA	87.5*	NA	NA
-ns	87.5*	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-nt	75*	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA
-sk	75*	NA	NA	75*	NA	NA
-st	87.5*	NA	NA	100*^#	NA	NA

F, females; M, males; *, acquired cluster; *^#, mastered cluster.

Note: Females and males were not separated in current data due to small sample sizes. NA, not applicable, as percentage of correct responses for these clusters at 3- and 4-years was not reported in Smit et al. (1990).

^aCurrent study used eight children aged 3 years, and eight children aged 4 years to sample, while Smit et al. (1990) used 47 aged 3 years and 91 aged 4 years.

^bClusters were included if they occurred at least twice, or if they were marginal, occurring once, in keeping with McLeod et al. (2001b) and Smit et al. (1990).

^cScores from current data based on Single-Word Test of Consonant Clusters Test (McLeod & Hand, 1991).

Van Kleeck, A., Schwarz, A. L., Fey, M., Kaiser, A., Miller, J., & Weitzman, E. (2010). Should we use telegraphic or grammatical input in the early stages of language development with children who have language impairments? A meta-analysis of the research and expert opinion. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 3–21.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Boutron, I. M. D. P., Moher, D. P., Altman, D. G. D., Schulz, K. F. P. M. B. A., Ravaud, P. M. D. P., & for the, C. G. (2008). Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 148, 295–309.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Clark, J. G. (1981). Uses and abuses of hearing loss classification. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 23, 493–500.

 Google Scholar

Beveridge, A., & Weber, S. (2003). Income, education and occupation data analysis of 2000 and 2003 US Census Bureau. New York: Queens College Sociology Department.

 Google Scholar

McLeod, S., & Hand, L. (1991). Single Word Test of Consonant Clusters. Sydney: The University of Sydney. http://athene.riv.csu.edu.au/˜smcleod/Consonant

 Google Scholar

Smit, A., Hand, L., Freilinger, J., Bernthal, J., & Bird, A. (1990). The Iowa articulation norms project and its Nebraska replication. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 779–798.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

McLeod, S., van Doorn, J., & Reed, V. A. (2001b). Consonant cluster development in two-year-olds: General trends and individual difference. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 1144–1171.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar