Differential Effects of Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Intervention for Residual Speech Errors

Area of Science:

• Speech-language pathology
• Clinical audiology
• Motor learning

Background:

• Residual speech errors, particularly rhotic errors, persist despite traditional therapy.
• Visual biofeedback technologies show promise for enhancing treatment response.
• Controlled studies comparing biofeedback and traditional methods are needed.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the relative efficacy of visual-acoustic biofeedback versus traditional articulatory treatment for residual rhotic errors.
• To examine the impact of treatment order on intervention effectiveness.

Main Methods:

• Single-subject experimental design with a crossover component.
• Eleven child/adolescent participants received counterbalanced visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment phases.
• Perceptual accuracy of rhotic production was assessed by blinded, randomized listeners.

Main Results:

• Participants showed varied responses, categorized as strong, mixed/moderate, or non-responders.
• No consistent superiority of biofeedback over traditional treatment or vice versa was found across all participants.
• An interaction effect indicated biofeedback was more effective initially, while traditional treatment was more effective later.

Conclusions:

• The effectiveness of visual biofeedback for residual rhotic errors is not universally superior to traditional methods.
• Early-stage biofeedback may be beneficial for motor learning in speech sound disorders.
• Further research is needed to identify optimal biofeedback duration and patient-specific response predictors.