Current Issue
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
Sign in as an AUTHOR/REVIEWER
REVIEW PAPER
EVALUATION OF ENDOGENOUS AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIALS IN CHILDREN WITH SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT: A REVIEW
1
Department of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, India
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article;
Publication date: 2021-12-03
Corresponding author
Prashanth Prabhu
Department of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Manasagangothri, 570006, Mysore, India
Department of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Manasagangothri, 570006, Mysore, India
J Hear Sci 2021;11(3):9-19
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Children with specific language impairment (SLI) have poorer language ability and have difficulties understanding complex sentences even though they have no clear sensory, motor, or neurological abnormalities. Nevertheless, they may exhibit auditory processing deficits. Hence the present study was conducted to provide an overview of endogenous auditory evoked potentials in this population, potentials which may help in early identification of subtle auditory processing deficits.
Material and Methods:
Relevant articles were included from searches of two electronic data sources, Google Scholar and PubMed. Articles on endogenous potentials in children with SLI were included, but studies on exogenous potentials in children with SLI were excluded.
Results:
The results of the review showed contradictory findings in terms of mismatch negativity. Some studies report a statistically significant difference in waveform morphology, latency, and amplitude of mismatch negativity between children with SLI and a control group. This suggests that these children might have auditory processing problems at higher auditory centers. A few other studies find no difference in evoked potentials, pointing to intact auditory processing abilities in children with SLI.
Conclusions:
The study helps us understand auditory processing abilities at the level of the higher auditory areas. Endogenous potentials may be included in a battery of tests for identifying children with SLI.
Children with specific language impairment (SLI) have poorer language ability and have difficulties understanding complex sentences even though they have no clear sensory, motor, or neurological abnormalities. Nevertheless, they may exhibit auditory processing deficits. Hence the present study was conducted to provide an overview of endogenous auditory evoked potentials in this population, potentials which may help in early identification of subtle auditory processing deficits.
Material and Methods:
Relevant articles were included from searches of two electronic data sources, Google Scholar and PubMed. Articles on endogenous potentials in children with SLI were included, but studies on exogenous potentials in children with SLI were excluded.
Results:
The results of the review showed contradictory findings in terms of mismatch negativity. Some studies report a statistically significant difference in waveform morphology, latency, and amplitude of mismatch negativity between children with SLI and a control group. This suggests that these children might have auditory processing problems at higher auditory centers. A few other studies find no difference in evoked potentials, pointing to intact auditory processing abilities in children with SLI.
Conclusions:
The study helps us understand auditory processing abilities at the level of the higher auditory areas. Endogenous potentials may be included in a battery of tests for identifying children with SLI.
REFERENCES (41)
1.
Tomblin JB, Records N, Buckwalter P, Zhang X, Smith E, O’Brie M. The prevalence of specific language impairment in kindergarten children. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 1997; 40: 1245–60.
2.
Conti-Ramsden G, Mok PLH, Pickles A, Durkin K. Adolescents with a history of specific language impairment (SLI): strengths and difficulties in social, emotional and behavioral functioning. Res Dev Disabil, 2013; 34: 4161–9.
3.
Leonard LB. Children with Specific Language Impairment. Cambridge MA, MIT Press, 1998.
4.
NIDCD. Fact Sheet: Voice, Speech, and Language Specific Language Impairment. National Institute of Deafness and other Communication Disorders. NIH Publication No. 11-7751, 2019.
5.
Bishop DVM, Snowling MJ, Tompson, PA, Greenhalgh T. Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: terminology. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 2017; 58(10): 1068–80.
6.
Jackson E, Leitao S, Claessen, M. The relationship between phonological short-term memory, receptive vocabulary, and fast mapping in children with specific language impairment. Int J Lang Commun Disord, 2016; 51(1): 61–73.
7.
Leonard L. Children with Specific Language Impairment, 2nd ed. Cambridge MA, MIT Press, 2014.
8.
Rinker T. Auditory processing in children with specific language impairment (SLI): an electrophysiological study. Dissertation, Freiburg, 2006.
9.
Elliott LL, Hammer MA. Longitudinal changes in auditory discrimination in normal children and children with language-learning problems. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 1988; 53: 467–74.
10.
McArthur GM, Bishop DVM. Speech and non-speech processing in people with specific language impairment: a behavioural and electrophysiological study. Brain Lang, 2005; 94: 260–73.
11.
Bishop DVM, HardimanM, Uwer R, von Suchodoletz W. A typical long-latency auditory event-related potentials in a subset of children with specific language impairment. Dev Sci, 2007; 10(5): 576–87.
12.
Tallal P, Stark RE, Mellits ED. Identification of language-impaired children on the basis of rapid perception and production skills. Brain Lang, 1985; 25(2): 314–22.
13.
Lowe AD, Campbell RA. Temporal discrimination in aphasoid and normal children. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 1965; 8(3): 313–7.
14.
Isoaho P, Kauppila T, Launonen K. Specific language impairment (SLI) and reading development in early school years. Child Lang Teach Therapy, 2016; 32(2): 147–57.
15.
Benasich AA, Tallal P. Infant discrimination of rapid auditory cues predicts later language impairment. Behav Brain Res, 2002; 136: 31–49.
16.
Barman A, Prabhu P, Mekhala VG, Vijayan K, Narayanan S. Electrophysiological findings in children with specific language impairment: a scoping review. Hear Balance Commun, 2020; 18(3): 1–5.
17.
Picton TW. The endogenous evoked potentials. In: Dynamics of Sensory and Cognitive Processing by the Brain: Integrative aspects of neural networks, electroencephalography, event-related potentials, contingent negative variation, magnetoencephalography, and clinical applications. Basar E, Melnechuk T (eds), Springer, New York, 1988, pp. 258–65.
18.
Royle P, Courteau E. Language processing in children with specific language impairment: a review of event-related potential studies. In: Language Processing: New research, Nova Science, 2014, pp. 33–64.
19.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals Intern Med, 2009, 151(4), 264–9. 20. Considine J, Shaban RZ, Fry M, Curtis K. Evidence based emergency nursing: designing a research question and searching the literature. Int Emerg Nurs, 2017; 32: 78–82.
20.
Baldeweg T, Richardson A, Watkins S, Foale C, Gruzelier J. Impaired auditory frequency discrimination in dyslexia detected with mismatch evoked potentials. Annals Neurol, 1999; 45: 495–503.
21.
Kraus N, McGee TJ, Carrell TD, Zecker SG, Nicol TG, Koch DB. Auditory neurophysiologic responses and discrimination deficits in children with learning problems. Science, 1996; 273: 971–3.
22.
Korpilahti P, Lang HA. Auditory ERP components and mismatch negativity in dysphasic children. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1994; 91(4): 256–64.
23.
Bishop DVM. Maturation of the long-latency auditory ERP: step function changes at start and end of adolescence. Dev Sci, 2007; 10: 1467–87.
24.
Dunn MA, Gomes H, Gravel J. Mismatch negativity in children with autism and typical development. J Autism Dev Disord, 2008; 38: 52–71.
25.
Abou-Elsaad T, AbdelTawwab MM. Mismatch negativity in children with specific language impairment. J Int Adv Otol, 2009; 5(1): 87–92.
26.
Rocha-Muniz CN, Befi-Lopes DM, Schochat E. Mismatch negativity in children with specific language impairment and auditory processing disorder. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, 2015; 81 (4): 408–415.
27.
Davids N, Segers E, van den Brink D, Mitterer H, van Balkom H, Hagoort P, et al. The nature of auditory discrimination problems in children with specific language impairment: an MMN study. Neuropsychologia, 2011; 49(1): 19–28.
28.
Shafer VL. Morr ML, Datta H. Neurophysiological indexes of speech processing deficits in children with specific language impairment. J Cognitive Neurosci, 2005; 17(7): 1168–80.
29.
Rinker T, Kohls G, Richter C, Maas V, Schulz E, Schecker M. Abnormal frequency discrimination in children with SLI as indexed by mismatch negativity (MMN). Neurosci, 2007; 13(2): 99–104.
30.
Uwer R, Albrecht R, Von Suchodoletz W. Automatic processing of tones and speech stimuli in children with specific language impairment. Dev Med Child Neurol, 2002; 44: 527–32.
31.
Squires NK, Squires KC, Hillyard SA. Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1975; 38(4): 387–401.
32.
Donchin E. Presidential Address, 1980: Surprise!... Surprise? Psychophysiol, 1981; 18(5): 493–513.
33.
Shaheen EA, Shohdy SS, Raouf MAA, Abd SMEA, Elhamid AA. Relation between language, audio-vocal psycholinguistic abilities and P300 in children having specific language impairment. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2011; 75(9): 1117–22.
34.
Evans JL, Pollak SD. P300 as a measure of processing capacity in auditory and visual domains in specific language impairment. Brain Res, 2011; 1389: 93–102.
35.
Włodarczyk E, Szkiełkowska A, Pilka A, Skarżyński H. Assessment of cortical auditory evoked potentials in children with specific language impairment. Otolaryngol Pol, 2017; 72(1): 16–22.
36.
Kutas M, Federmeier KD. Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annu Rev Psychol, 2011; 62: 621–47.
37.
Federmeier KD, Laszlo S. Time for meaning: electrophysiology provides insights into the dynamics of representation and processing in semantic memory. In: Ross BH (ed), Psychology of Learning and Motivation. Burlington, Academic Press, 2009; pp. 1–44.
38.
Sabisch B, Hahne A, Glass E, von Suchodoletz W, Friederici DA. Lexical–semantic processes in children with specific language impairment. Dev Neurosci, 2006; 17(14): 1511–4.
39.
Pijnacker J, Davids N, van Weerdenburg M, Verhoeven L, Knoors H, van Alphen P. Semantic processing of sentences in preschoolers with specific language impairment: evidence from the N400 effect. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 2017; 60: 627–39.
40.
Cummings A, Ceponiene R. Verbal and nonverbal semantic processing in children with developmental language impairment. Neuropsychologia, 2010; 48: 77–85.
41.
Sabisch B, Hahne A, Glass E, von Suchodoletz W, Friederici DA. Children with specific language impairment: the role of prosodic processes in explaining difficulties in processing syntactic information. Brain Res, 2009; 1261: 37–44.
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
