Assessment & Research

Benefits of simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation on verbal reasoning skills in prelingually deaf children.

Jacobs et al. (2016) · Research in developmental disabilities 2016
★ The Verdict

Two cochlear implants raise verbal IQ in deaf preschoolers by sharpening speech-in-noise hearing and auditory short-term memory.

✓ Read this if BCBAs working with deaf or hard-of-hearing preschoolers who have cochlear implants.
✗ Skip if BCBAs serving only children with normal hearing.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Jacobs et al. (2016) compared deaf preschoolers who got two cochlear implants at once with kids who got only one. They wanted to know if two implants help verbal reasoning.

The team tested speech perception in noise and auditory short-term memory. They used simple tests that teachers could repeat.

02

What they found

Kids with two implants scored higher on verbal IQ tests than kids with one. The boost came from better hearing in noise and stronger auditory short-term memory.

Children in regular classrooms gained the most. Better hearing and memory explained the whole effect.

03

How this fits with other research

Amaral et al. (2019) saw the same chain in Down syndrome. Better auditory short-term memory linked sustained attention to bigger vocabularies. Both studies show auditory memory is the bridge.

Crosbie (1993) and Rasing et al. (1992) used behavioral skills training to raise social talk in deaf children with language delays. They proved you can move language without changing hearing gear. Evi’s team moves language by changing the gear first.

No clash exists. One path changes the input device; the other path teaches new responses. Both aim at stronger language.

04

Why it matters

If you serve deaf clients with implants, push for bilateral surgery when families can choose. Track speech-in-noise scores and auditory memory span. When either lags, add listening games or echoic training to close the gap. For kids who can’t get a second implant, copy the 1993 BST package: model, practice, and reinforce social language until gains stick.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Run a 5-minute auditory memory game: say three numbers, have the child repeat them back, then make the list longer as scores climb.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
quasi experimental
Sample size
49
Population
developmental delay
Finding
positive
Magnitude
medium

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: Impaired auditory speech perception abilities in deaf children with hearing aids compromised their verbal intelligence enormously. The availability of unilateral cochlear implantation (CI) auditory speech perception and spoken vocabulary enabled them to reach near ageappropriate levels. This holds especially for children in spoken language environments. However, speech perception in complex listening situations and the acquisition of complex verbal skills remains difficult. Bilateral CI was expected to enhance the acquisition of verbal intelligence by improved understanding of speech in noise. METHODS: This study examined the effect of bilateral CI on verbal intelligence of 49 deaf children (3;5-8;0 years). Relations between speech perception in noise, auditory short-term memory and verbal intelligence were analysed with multiple linear regressions. In addition, the interaction of educational setting, mainstream or special, on these relations was analysed. RESULTS: Children with bilateral CI obtained higher scores on verbal intelligence. Significant associations were present between speech perception in noise, auditory short-term memory and verbal intelligence. CONCLUSION: Children with simultaneous bilateral CIs showed better speech perception in noise than children with unilateral CIs, which mediated by the auditory short-term memory capacity, enhanced the ability to acquire more complex verbal skills for BICI children in mainstream education.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2016 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.08.016