Measuring the understanding of sentences by hearing-impaired children: Comparison with connected discourse ratings

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 38-49

  Kei, Joseph ^a   Smyth, Veronica ^a   Murdoch, Bruce ^a   McPhersor, Bradley ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Children Cantonese; Connected discourse; Hearing impairment; Sentence test; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHINESE; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FEMALE; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HONG KONG; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOISE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ADOLESCENT; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PILOT PROJECTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0034034823     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/00206090009073053     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. World Health Organization. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps: a manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. WHO, Geneva 1980
2. Boothroyd A. Developments in speech audiometry. Sound 1968; 2: 3–10
3. Bilger R C. Speech recognition test development. ASHA Reports 1984; 14: 2–15
4. Giolas T G, Epstein A. Comparative intelligibility of word lists and continuous discourse. J Speech Hear Res 1963; 6: 349–358
5. Oneill J J. Recognition of intelligibility test materials in context and isolation. J Speech Hear Disord 1957; 22: 87–90
6. Kei J, Smyth V. Measuring the ability of hearing impaired school-aged children to understand connected discourse using an intelligibility self-rating procedure. Aust J Audiol 1996; 18: 23–33
7. Kei J, Smyth V. Measuring the ability of hearing impaired school-aged children to understand connected discourse: a comparison of two methods. Br J Audiol 1997; 31: 283–297
8. Elliott L L. Performance of children aged 9 to 17 years on a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence material with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am 1979; 66: 651–653
9. Bench J, Kowal A, Bamford J. The BKB (Bam-ford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 1979; 13: 108–112
10. Bench J, Bamford J M, Wilson I M, Clifft L. A comparison of the BKB sentence lists for children with other speech audiometry tests. Aust J Audiol 1979; 1: 61–66
11. Jerger S, Jerger J. Pediatric speech intelligibility test: performance-intensity characteristics. Ear Hear 1982; 3: 325–334
12. Kalikow D N, Stevens K N, Elliott L L. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am 1977; 61: 1337–1351
13. Bilger R C, Nuetzel J M, Rabinowitz W M, Rzeczkowski C. Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. J Speech Hear Res 1984; 27: 32–48
14. Davis H, Silverman S R. Hearing and Deafness, 4th Ed. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York 1978
15. Tschopp K, Züst H. Performance of normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners using a German version of the SPIN test. Scand Audiol 1994; 23: 241–247
16. Bench J, Doyle J, Greenwood K M. A standardisation of the BKB/A sentence test for children in comparison with the NAL-C1D sentence test and the CAP-PBM word test. Aust J Audiol 1987; 9: 39–48
17. Cox R M, Alexander G C, Rivera I M. Comparison of objective and subjective measures of speech intelligibility in elderly hearing-impaired listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1991; 34: 904–915
18. Kollmeier B, Wesselkamp M. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 102: 2412–2421
19. Matthies M L, Carney A E. A modified speech tracking procedure as a communicative performance measure. J Speech Hear Res 1988; 31: 394–404
20. Jerger S, Jerger J. Pediatric Speech Intelligibility test. Auditec, St Louis 1984
21. Plant G, Moore A. The common objects token (COT) test: a sentence test for profoundly hearing impaired children. Aust J Audiol 1992; 14: 76–83
22. Plant G, Moore A. Two speech discrimination tests for profoundly hearing-impaired children. Aust J Audiol 1992; 14: 28–40
23. Ludvigsen C. Construction and evaluation of an audio-visual test (the Helen test). 1974; 67–75, Scand Audiol;(Suppl 4)
24. Ewertsen H W. Auditory and audio-visual speech perception related to hearing disorders. Scand Audiol, 1974; 76–82, (Suppl 4)
25. Svendsen M. Scores in visual intelligibility tests related to the scores in the Helen tests. Scand Audiol, 1974; 89–96, (Suppl4)
26. Plant G. COMMTRAM-A communication training program for profoundly deafened adults. National Acoustic Laboratories, Sydney 1984
27. Giolas T G. Comparative intelligibility scores of sentence lists and continuous discourse. J Auditory Res 1966; 6: 31–38
28. Kei J, Chan T, Ma M C, et al. Cantonese speech audiometry for children of Hong Kong. Aust J Audiol 1991; 13: 41–45
29. Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–265
30. Byrne D, Parkinson A, Newall P. Hearing aid gain and frequency response requirements for the severely/profoundly hearing impaired. Ear Hear 1990; 11: 40–49
31. Byrne D. Effects of frequency response characteristics on speech discrimination and perceived intelligibility and pleasantness of speech for hearing impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 80: 494–504
32. Cox R M, McDaniel D M. Intelligibility ratings of continuous discourse: application to hearing aid selection. J Acoust Soc Am 1984; 76: 758–766
33. Cox R M, McDaniel D M. Development of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons. J Speech Hear Res 1989; 32: 347–352
34. Speaks C, Parker B, Harris C, Kuhl P. Intelligibility of connected discourse. J Speech Hear Res 1972; 15: 590–602
35. Gray T F, Speaks C E. Ability of hearing impaired listeners to understand connected discourse. J Am AudSoc 1978; 3: 159–166
36. Siegel S, Castellan N J. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, 2nd Ed. McGraw-Hill, New York 1988
37. SPSS. Advanced statistics manual Version 7.5. SPSS, hicago 1997
38. Markides A. Binaural hearing aids. Academic Press, London 1977
39. Jensen J H, Johansen P A, Borre S. Unilateral sensorineural hearing loss in children and auditory performance with respect to right/left ear differences. Br J Audiol 1989; 23: 207–213
40. Kei J, Murdoch B, Smyth V, McPherson B. Predicting the understanding of Cantonese connected discourse. Asia Pac J Speech Lang Hear 1997; 2: 203–226
41. Saunders G H, Haggard M P. The clinical assessment of “Obscure Auditory Dysfunction” (OAD) 2. Case control analysis of determining factors. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 241–254