DATASET
JSLHR_57_6_2102SuppExcel.xls (46 kB)
VIDEO
JSLHR_57_6_2102Suppvideo.avi (8.3 MB)
1/0
Supplemental for Ultrasound Visual Feedback Treatment and Practice Variability for Residual Speech Sound Errors (Preston et al., 2014)
dataset
posted on 2014-12-01, 00:00 authored by Jonathan L. Preston, Patricia McCabe, Ahmed Rivera-Campos, Jessica L. Whittle, Erik Landry, Edwin MaasPurpose The goals were to (a) test the efficacy of a motor-learning-based treatment that includes ultrasound visual feedback for individuals with residual speech sound errors and (b) explore whether the addition of prosodic cueing facilitates speech sound learning.
Method A multiple-baseline, single-subject design was used, replicated across 8 participants. For each participant, 1 sound context was treated with ultrasound plus prosodic cueing for 7 sessions, and another sound context was treated with ultrasound but without prosodic cueing for 7 sessions. Sessions included ultrasound visual feedback as well as non-ultrasound treatment. Word-level probes assessing untreated words were used to evaluate retention and generalization.
Results For most participants, increases in accuracy of target sound contexts at the word level were observed with the treatment program regardless of whether prosodic cueing was included. Generalization between onset singletons and clusters was observed, as was generalization to sentence-level accuracy. There was evidence of retention during posttreatment probes, including at a 2-month follow-up.
Conclusion A motor-based treatment program that includes ultrasound visual feedback can facilitate learning of speech sounds in individuals with residual speech sound errors.
Method A multiple-baseline, single-subject design was used, replicated across 8 participants. For each participant, 1 sound context was treated with ultrasound plus prosodic cueing for 7 sessions, and another sound context was treated with ultrasound but without prosodic cueing for 7 sessions. Sessions included ultrasound visual feedback as well as non-ultrasound treatment. Word-level probes assessing untreated words were used to evaluate retention and generalization.
Results For most participants, increases in accuracy of target sound contexts at the word level were observed with the treatment program regardless of whether prosodic cueing was included. Generalization between onset singletons and clusters was observed, as was generalization to sentence-level accuracy. There was evidence of retention during posttreatment probes, including at a 2-month follow-up.
Conclusion A motor-based treatment program that includes ultrasound visual feedback can facilitate learning of speech sounds in individuals with residual speech sound errors.
