Contribution of Family Environment to Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users' Speech and Language Outcomes: Some Preliminary Findings PurposeTo evaluate the family environments of children with cochlear implants and to examine relationships between family environment and postimplant language development and executive function.MethodForty-five families of children with cochlear implants completed a self-report family environment questionnaire (Family Environment Scale—Fourth Edition; Moos & Moos, 2009) and an inventory of executive function ... Article
Article  |   June 01, 2012
Contribution of Family Environment to Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users' Speech and Language Outcomes: Some Preliminary Findings
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Rachael Frush Holt
    Indiana University, Bloomington
  • Jessica Beer
    Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
  • William G. Kronenberger
    Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
  • David B. Pisoni
    Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
  • Kaylah Lalonde
    Indiana University, Bloomington
  • Correspondence to Rachael Frush Holt: raholt@indiana.edu
  • Editor: Sid Bacon
    Editor: Sid Bacon×
  • Associate Editor: Emily Tobey
    Associate Editor: Emily Tobey×
Article Information
Hearing
Article   |   June 01, 2012
Contribution of Family Environment to Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users' Speech and Language Outcomes: Some Preliminary Findings
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 2012, Vol. 55, 848-864. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/11-0143)
History: Received June 2, 2011 , Revised August 27, 2011 , Accepted October 10, 2011
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 2012, Vol. 55, 848-864. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/11-0143)
History: Received June 2, 2011; Revised August 27, 2011; Accepted October 10, 2011
Web of Science® Times Cited: 23

PurposeTo evaluate the family environments of children with cochlear implants and to examine relationships between family environment and postimplant language development and executive function.

MethodForty-five families of children with cochlear implants completed a self-report family environment questionnaire (Family Environment Scale—Fourth Edition; Moos & Moos, 2009) and an inventory of executive function (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [Gioia, Isquith, Guy, & Kenworthy, 2000 ] or Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Preschool Version [Gioia, Espy, & Isquith, 2003 ]). The authors also evaluated children's receptive vocabulary (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Fourth Edition; Dunn & Dunn, 2007) and global language skills (Preschool Language Scale—Fourth Edition [Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2002 ] and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals—Fourth Edition [Semel, Wiig, & Secord, 2003 ]).

ResultsThe family environments of children with cochlear implants differed from those of normal-hearing children but not in clinically significant ways. Language development and executive function were found to be atypical but not uncharacteristic of this clinical population. Families with higher levels of self-reported control had children with smaller vocabularies. Families reporting a higher emphasis on achievement had children with fewer executive function and working memory problems. Finally, families reporting a higher emphasis on organization had children with fewer problems related to inhibition.

ConclusionSome of the variability in cochlear implantation outcomes that have protracted periods of development is related to family environment. Because family environment can be modified and enhanced by therapy or education, these preliminary findings hold promise for future work in helping families to create robust language-learning environments that can maximize their child's potential with a cochlear implant.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Grants T32 DC00011 and DC009581. Portions of this work were presented at the 13th Symposium of Cochlear Implants in Children, Chicago, IL (July 2011). We are grateful to Shirley Henning and Bethany Colson for their contributions to data collection.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access