Tri-word presentations with phonemic scoring for practical high-reliability speech recognition assessment

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 46, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 405-412

  Gelfand, Stanley A ^a,b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Phonemic scoring; Reliability; Speech audiometry; Speech recognition; Tri word (presentations)

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONSONANT; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PHONEME; RELIABILITY; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VOWEL;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST;

EID: 0037390935     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/033)     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American National Standards Institute. (1996). American national standard specifications for audiometers (ANSI S3.6, 1996). New York: Author.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1991). Maximum permissible ambient noise levels for audiometric test rooms (ANSI S3.1, 1991). New York: Author.
3. Boothroyd, A. (1968a). Developments in speech audiometry. Sound, 2, 3-10.
4. Boothroyd, A. (1968b). Statistical theory of the speech discrimination score. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 43, 362-367.
5. Boothroyd, A., & Nittrouer, S. (1988). Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 101-114.
6. Feeney, M. P., & Hallowell, B. (2000). Practice and list effects on the Synthetic Sentence Identification Test in young and elderly listeners. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 43, 1160-1167.
7. Gelfand, S. A. (1998). Optimizing the reliability of speech recognition scores. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1088-1102.
8. Groen, J. J., & Helleman, A .C. (1960). Binaural speech audiometry. Acta Otolaryngologica, 52, 397-314.
9. Haagen, C. H. (1945). Intelligibility measurement: Twenty-four multiple-choice tests (Office of Scientific Research and Development Report No. 5567). U.S. Dept. of Commerce PB 12050.
10. Hagerman, B. (1976). Reliability in the determination of speech discrimination. Scandinavian Audiology, 5, 219-228.
11. Harris, J. D. (1980). On the use of a 3-words-per-item format in tests for the hearing of speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 345-347.
12. Keidser, G. (1993). Normative data in quiet and in noise for "DANTALE" - A Danish speech material. Scandinavian Audiology, 22, 231-236.
13. Mackersie, C. L., Boothroyd, A., & Minniear, D. (2001). Evaluation of the Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment Test (CASPA). Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 12, 390-396.
14. Markides, A. (1978). Whole-word scoring versus phoneme scoring in speech audiometry. British Journal of Audiology, 12, 40-46.
15. Martin, F. N., Armstrong, T. W., & Champlin, C. A. (1994). A survey of audiological practices in the United States. American Journal of Audiology, 3(2), 20-26.
16. Nittrouer, S., & Boothroyd, A. (1990). Context effects in phoneme and word recognition of young children and older adults. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 2705-2715.
17. Olsen, W. O. (1983). Research trends and clinical needs in speech audiometry. In D.F. Konkle & W.F. Rintlemann (Eds.), Principles of Speech Audiometry (pp. 375-395). Baltimore: University Park Press.
18. Olsen, W. O., Van Tasell, D. J., & Speaks, C. E. (1997). Phoneme and word recognition for words in isolation and in sentences. Ear and Hearing, 18, 175-188.
19. Raffin, M. J. M., & Schafer, D. (1980). Application of a probability model based on the binomial distribution to speech-discrimination scores. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 23, 570-575.
20. Raffin, M. J. M., & Thornton, A. (1980). Confidence levels for differences between speech discrimination scores. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 23, 5-18.
21. Sergeant, L., Atkinson, J. E., & LaCroix, P. G. (1979). The NSMRL tri-word test of intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 65, 218-222.
22. Speaks, C., & Jerger, J. (1965). Method for measurement of speech identification. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 8, 185-194.
23. Thornton, A., & Raffin, M. J. M. (1978). Speech discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 21, 507-518.
24. Watson, N. A., & Knudsen, V. O. (1940). Selective amplification in hearing aids. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 11, 406-419.
25. Williams, C. E., Mosko, J. D., & Greene, J. W. (1976). Evaluating the ability of aircrew personnel to hear speech in their operational environments. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 47, 154-158.