Evaluation of the Relationship between Auditory Processing Skills and Academic Achievement in Adolescents

Yıl 2024, , 223 - 229, 08.10.2024

Nuriye Yıldırım Gökay , Gurbet İpek Şahin Kamışlı

https://doi.org/10.32708/uutfd.1454679

Öz

We encounter various listening conditions such as noisy, quiet, and multi-source sounds in daily life, especially in school environments. This study investigates whether the dichotic listening and speech-in-noise discrimination skills of adolescents aged 13-18 are associated with their academic performance. A total of 74 volunteers participated in the study and were divided into two groups based on whether they had complaints about understanding speech in noise. The volunteers' dichotic auditory processing skills were assessed with the "Dichotic Sentence Test," and their speech-in-noise discrimination skills were evaluated with the "Auditory Figure Ground Test." The current high-school grade point averages of adolescents and scores from the "Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk" were used to assess academic achievement. SPSS v24 software was used for data analysis, and a type 1 error level of 0,05 was determined. As a result, adolescents with complaints about understanding speech in noise showed statistically significant differences in personal headphone usage durations, grade point averages, auditory processing test scores, and academic scale scores (p < 0,05). Moderate to strong correlations were obtained between academic achievement scale scores and auditory processing scores (p < 0,05 and, r = 0,631, r = 0,571, r = 0,566, r = 0,495). The presence of noise, prolonged loud personal headphone use, and weak auditory processing skills can negatively impact the academic success of adolescents. The current study will help to guide experts in this field and raise awareness about hearing health in adolescents.

Anahtar Kelimeler

adolescents, auditory processing, noise, academic achievement

Adölesanlarda İşitsel İşleme Becerileri ile Akademik Başarı Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Günlük yaşamda özellikle okul ortamları olmak üzere gürültülü, sessiz, çok ses kaynaklı gibi farklı dinleme koşulları ile karşı karşıya kalmaktayız. Bu çalışma 13-18 yaşları arasındaki adölesanların; dikotik dinleme ve gürültüde konuşmayı ayırt etme becerilerinin, akademik performansları ile ilişkili olup olmadığını araştırmaktadır. Çalışmaya toplamda 74 gönüllü katılmış olup, gürültüde konuşmayı anlama şikâyetlerinin olup olmamasına göre iki gruba ayrılmışlardır. Gönüllülerin dikotik işitsel işlemleme becerileri “Dikotik Cümle Testi” ile, gürültüde konuşmayı ayırt etme becerileri ise “İşitsel Figür Zemin Testi” ile değerlendirilmiştir. Adölesanların güncel not ortalamaları ve “Akademik Başarıyı Etkileyen Riskleri Tarama Ölçeği” skorları, akademik başarılarını değerlendirmede kullanılmıştır. Bulguların analizinde SPPS v.24 programı kullanılmıştır ve tip 1 hata düzeyi 0,05 olarak saptanmıştır. Sonuçta gürültüde konuşmayı anlama şikâyeti olan bireylerle, olmayan bireyler arasında; kişisel kulaklık günlük kullanım süreleri, not ortalaması, işitsel işlemleme test skorları ve akademik başarı ölçeği skorlarında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılıklar saptanmıştır (p < 0,05). Akademik başarı ölçeği skorları ile işitsel işlemleme skorları arasında orta ve güçlü düzeylerde anlamlı korelasyonlar (p < 0,05 ve r = 0,631, r = 0,571, r = 0,566, r = 0,495) elde edilmiştir. Gürültü varlığı, yüksek sesle uzun süre kişisel kulaklık kullanımı, zayıf işitsel işlemleme becerileri adölesanların akademik başarısını olumsuz etkileyebilmektedir. Mevcut çalışma bu konuda uzmanlara yol gösterici olmayı, adölesanlarda işitme sağlığı açısından farkındalık yaratmayı öngörmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

adölesanlar, işitsel işlemleme, gürültü, akademik başarı

Kaynakça

• 1. Yücel E, Özkan HB. İşitsel rehabilitasyon. T J Audiology and Hear 2020;3(1):19-22.
• 2. De Wit E, Visser-Bochane MI, Steenbergen B, et al. Characteristics of auditory processing disorders: A systematic review. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2016;59(2):384-413.
• 3. Putter-Katz H, Adi-Bensaid L, Feldman I, Hildesheimer M. Effects of speech in noise and dichotic listening intervention programs on central auditory processing disorders. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 2008;19(3-4):301-16.
• 4. Keith RW. Clinical issues in central auditory processing disorders. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 1999;30(4):339-44.
• 5. Ceyhan AK, Aslan C, Doğan ED. Santral işitsel işlemleme bozukluğu için işitsel becerilerin iyileştirilmesine yönelik terapi yaklaşimlari. T J Audiology and Hear 2023;6(3):112-9.
• 6. Bolulu A, Elkin N. İşitsel işlemleme, bozuklukları ve potansiyeller. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2019(8):816-26.
• 7. Yalçınkaya F, Belgin E. Konuşma ve lisan problemi olan ve olmayan çocukların uyarlanmış şaşırtmacalı kelime testi ile santral işitsel işlemleme performanslarının incelenmesi. Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Dergisi 2002;46(3):195-202.
• 8. Bayazit O, Öniz A, Adile Ö, Özgören M, Özgören M. Dikotik dinlemede dikkatin kulak tercihine etkisi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2008;22(2):47-55.
• 9. Heine C, Slone M. The impact of mild central auditory processing disorder on school performance during adolescence. J Sch Health 2008;78(7):405-8.
• 10, Moncrieff D, Miller E, Hill E. Screening tests reveal high risk among adjudicated adolescents of auditory processing and language disorders. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018;61(4):924-35.
• 11. Choi SMR, Kei J, Wilson WJ. Hearing and auditory processing abilities in primary school children with learning difficulties. Ear Hear 2019;40(3):700-9.
• 12. Minelli G, Puglisi GE, Astolfi A. Acoustical parameters for learning in classroom: A review. BUILD ENVIRON 2022;208:108582.
• 13. McCreery RW, Miller MK, Buss E, Leibold LJ. Cognitive and linguistic contributions to masked speech recognition in children. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2020;63(10):3525-38.
• 14. Bulunuz M, Bulunuz N, Tavşanli Öf, Orbak Ay, Mutlu N. İlkokullarda gürültü kirliliğinin düzeyi, etkileri ve kontrol edilmesine yönelik sınıf öğretmenlerinin görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi 2018;26(3):661-71.
• 15. Taskin C. The Visual and Auditory Reaction Time of Adolescents with Respect to Their Academic Achievements. J Educ Train Stud 2016;4(3):202-7.
• 16. Thompson R, Smith RB, Karim YB, et al. Noise pollution and human cognition: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of recent evidence. Environ Int 2022;158:106905.
• 17. Goldblat E, Pinto OY. Academic outcomes of adolescents and young adults with hearing loss who received auditory-verbal therapy. Deaf Educ Int 2017;19(3-4):126-33.
• 18. Ahn JH, Oh S-H, Jang H, Lee J-B, Chung JW. Impact of hearing loss on the performance of auditory processing measured by questionnaires in Korean adolescents. Sci Rep 2020;10(1):10118.
• 19. le Clercq CM, Labuschagne LJ, Franken M-CJ, et al. Association of slight to mild hearing loss with behavioral problems and school performance in children. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020;146(2):113-20,
• 20, Caviola S, Visentin C, Borella E, Mammarella I, Prodi N. Out of the noise: Effects of sound environment on maths performance in middle-school students. J Environ Psychol 2021;73:101552.
• 21. Ebert S. Theory of mind, language, and reading: Developmental relations from early childhood to early adolescence. J Exp Child Psychol 2020;191:104739.
• 22. Haverkamp BF, Wiersma R, Vertessen K, et al. Effects ofphysical activity interventions on cognitive outcomes and academic performance in adolescents and young adults: Ameta-analysis. J Sports Sci 2020;38(23):2637-60,
• 23. Herrera L, Al-Lal M, Mohamed L. Academic achievement, self-concept, personality and emotional intelligence in primary education. Analysis by gender and cultural group. Front psychol 2020;10:3075.
• 24. Domitz DM, Schow RL. A new CAPD battery—Multiple auditory processing assessment. 2000
• 25. Schow RL, Seikel JA, Chermak GD, Berent M. Central Auditory Processes and Test Measures. 2000
• 26. Bolulu A, Elkin N. İşitsel işlemleme, bozuklukları ve potansiyeller. Istanbul Gelisim University Journal of HealthSciences 2019(8), 816-826.
• 27. Turkyılmaz MD, Yılmaz S, Yagcıoglu S, Yaralı M, Celik N. Computerised Turkish versions of tests for central auditory processing disorder. Med Sci Monit 2012;2(1):OA30-OA5.
• 28. Yathiraj A, Vanaja CS. Criteria to classify children as having auditory processing disorders. Am J Audiol 2018;27(2), 173-183.
• 29. Ferreira GC, Costa MJ, editors. Variability of the dichotic sentence test in the test and retest of normal hearing adults. CoDAS; 2020: SciELO Brasil.
• 30. Fifer RC, Jerger JF, Berlin CI, Tobey EA, Campbell JC.Development of a dichotic sentence identification test for hearing-impaired adults. Ear and Hear 1983;4(6):300-5.
• 31. Jerger J, Martin J. Dichotic listening tests in the assessment ofauditory processing disorders. Audiol Med 2006;4(1):25-34.
• 32. Wilson WJ, Jackson A, Pender A, et al. The CHAPS, SIFTER,and TAPS–R as Predictors of (C) AP Skills and (C) APD. 2011.
• 33. Yalçınkaya F, Küçükünal IS, Özçelik ADÖ. Teachers’ opinions regarding the symptoms of central auditory processing disorder in children with reading and writing difficulties. S Afr J Educ 2020;40(2):1-9.
• 34. Yalçinkaya F, Türkyilmaz MD, Keith R, Harris R. The Scan-C (Children) in Testing for Auditory Processing Disorder in a Sample of Turkish Children. J Int Adv Otol 2015;11.
• 35. Anderson KL. Screening identification for targeting educational risk. Denver, Co: Educational Audiology Association. 1989.
• 36. Choi SMR, Kei J, Wilson WJ. Learning difficulties and auditory processing deficits in a clinical sample of primary school-aged children. Int J Audiol 2020;59(11):874-80,
• 37. Allen P, Allan C. Auditory processing disorders: Relationshipto cognitive processes and underlying auditory neural integrity.Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014;78(2):198-208.
• 38. Miller G, Lewis B, Benchek P, Buss E, Calandruccio L.Masked speech recognition and reading ability in school-agechildren: Is there a relationship? J Speech Lang Hear Res2018;61(3):776-88.
• 39. Mealings K. Classroom acoustics and cognition: A review ofthe effects of noise and reverberation on primary school children’s attention and memory. Build Acoust 2022;29(3):401-31.
• 40, Batho LP, Martinussen R, Wiener J. The effects of different types of environmental noise on academic performance and perceived task difficulty in adolescents with ADHD. J Atten Disord 2020;24(8):1181-91.
• 41. Kim MG, Hong SM, Shim HJ, et al. Hearing threshold ofKorean adolescents associated with the use of personal music players. Yonsei Med J 2009;50(6):771.