Auditory Temporal Processing Abilities in Early Azari-Persian Bilinguals

Document Type: Original


1 Department of Audiology, Faculty of rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Audiology, Faculty of rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

3 Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of rehabilitation , Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.


Auditory temporal resolution and auditory temporal ordering are two major components of the auditory temporal processing abilities that contribute to speech perception and language development. Auditory temporal resolution and auditory temporal ordering can be evaluated by gap-in-noise (GIN) and pitch-pattern-sequence (PPS) tests, respectively. In this survey, the effect of bilingualism as a potential confounding factor on auditory temporal processing abilities was investigated in early Azari-Persian bilinguals.
Materials and Methods:                                    
In this cross-sectional non-interventional study, GIN and PPS tests were performed on 24
(12 men and 12 women) early Azari-Persian bilingual persons and 24 (12 men and 12 women) Persian monolingual subjects in the age range of 18–30 years, with a mean age of 24.57 years in bilingual and 24.68 years in monolingual subjects. Data were analyzed with t-test using SPSS software version 16.
There was no statistically significant difference between mean gap threshold and mean percentages of the correct response of the GIN test and average percentage of correct responses in the PPS test between early Azari-Persian bilinguals and Persian monolinguals (P≥0.05).
According to the findings of this study, bilingualism did not have notable effect on auditory temporal processing abilities.


1. Korami-Nouri R, Shojaei RS, Moniri S, Gholami A-R, Moradi A-R, Akbari-Zardkhaneh S, et al. The effect of childhood bilingualism on episodic and semantic memory tasks. Scandinavian Journal Psychology 2008; 49(2): 93–109.

2. Musiek FE, Chermak GD, editors. Handbook of (central) auditory processing disorder. United Kingdom: Plural Publishing; 2007:118.

3. Frederigue-Lopes NB, Bevilacqua MC, Sameshima K, Costa OA. Performance of typical children in free field auditory temporal tests. Pro-FonoRevista de AtualizacaoCientifica 2010; 22(2): 83–8.

4. Rance G, Aud D. Auditory neurophaty/dys-synchrony and its perceptual consequences. Trends Amplif 2005; 9(1):1–43.

5. Stuart A. Development of auditory temporal resolution in school-age children revealed by word recognition in continuous and interrupted noise. Ear and hearing 2005; 26(1): 78–88.

6. Musiek FE, Shinn JB, Jirsa R, Bamiou DE, Baran JA, Zaida E. GIN (Gaps-In-Noise) test performance in subjects with confirmed central auditory nervous system involvement. Ear and hearing 2005; 26(6): 608–18.

7. Tabri D, Chacra KMSA, Pring T. Speech perception in noise by monolingual, bilingual and trilingual listeners. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 2011; 46(4): 411–22.

8. von Hapsburg D, Champlin CA, Shetty SR. Reception thresholds for sentences in bilingual (Spanish/English) and monolingual (English) listeners. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 2004; 15(1): 88–98.

9. Omidvar S, Jafari Z, Tahaei AA. Evaluating the results of Persian version of the temporal resolution test in adults.  Audiol 2012; 21(1): 38–45.

10. Kuipers JR, Thierry G. Event-related brain potentials reveal the time-course of language change detection in early bilinguals. Neuroimage 2010; 50(4): 1633–8.

11. Perez AP, Pereira LD. O Teste Gap in Noise em criancas de 11 e 12 anos. Pro-Fono Revista de Atualizacao Cientifica 2010; 22(1): 7–12.

12. Richard W. pure ton evaluation. In: Katz J, editor. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 2009: 82.

13. Stanley  A, Gelfand . The acoustic reflex. In: Katz J, editor. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 2009: 211.

14. Rawool V W. temporal processing in the auditory system. In Geffner D, Ross – Swain D. Handbook of (central) auditory processing disorder. San Diego: Cambridge Univ Press; 2007:124.

15.  Siti Z, Mukari C, Umat Nor I. Effects of age and working memory capacity on pitch pattern sequence test and dichotic listening. AudiolNeurotol 2010; 15: 303–10.

16.  Amaral  MI , Colella-Santos MF. Temporal Resolution: performance of school-aged children in

the GIN – Gaps-in-noise test. BrazOtorhinolaryngol 2010; 76(6): 745–52.

17. Samelli AG, SchochatE. The gaps-in-noise test: gap detection thresholds in normal –hearing young adults. Int J Audiol 2008; 47(5): 238–45.

18.  Shin JB, Chemark GD, Musiek FE.GIN (Gap in noise ) performance in the pediatric population . J Am Acad Audiol 2009; 20: 229–38.

19. Zaidan E, Garcia AP, Tedesco MLF, Baran JA. Desempenho de adultos jovens normais em dois testes de resolucao temporal. Pro-fono Revista de Atualizacao Cientifica 2008; 20(1): 19–24.

20. Balen SA, Liebel G, Boeno MRM, Mottecy CM. Resolucao temporal de criancasescolares. Rev CEFAC [on line]. 2009; 11: suppl.1 p.52–61.

21. Krishnan A, Gandour JT, Bidelman GM. Brainstem pitch representation in native speakers of Mandarin is less susceptible to degradation of stimulus temporal regularity. Brain Research 2010; 1313: 124-33.

22. Onoda RM, Pereira LD, Guilherme A. Temporal Processing and Dichotic Listening in bilingual and non-bilingual descendants.Revista Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia 2006; 72(6): 737–46.

23. Gregory AH. Ear dominance for pitch. Neuropsychologia. 1982; 20(1): 89–90.

24. Rosen GD, Sherman G, Galaburda A. Ontogenesis of neocortical asymmetry: A [3H] thymidine study. Neuroscience1991; 41(2-3): 779–90.