Development of materials for the clinical assessment of speech recognition: The speech sound pattern discrimination test

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 889-900

  Bochner, Joseph H ^a   Garrison, Wayne M ^b   Sussman, Joan E ^c   Burkard, Robert F ^c  

^a ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Prof Assess/Information Services   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptive testing; Hearing loss; Software; Speech audiometry; Speech recognition testing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; PERFORMANCE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SOUND; SPEECH; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH THERAPY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MATERIALS TESTING; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0041974867     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/069)     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bochner, J., Garrison, W., & Palmer, L. (1992). Simple discrimination isn't really simple: A confirmatory analysis of the Speech Sound Pattern Discrimination Test. Scandinavian Audiology, 21, 37-49.
2. Bochner, J., Garrison, W., Palmer, L., MacKenzie, D., & Braveman, A. (1997). A computerized adaptive testing system for speech discrimination measurement: The Speech Sound Pattern Discrimination Test. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2289-2298.
3. Elliott, L. L., Busse, L., Partridge, R., Rupert, J., & DeGraaff, R. (1986). Adult and child discrimination of CV syllables differing in voice onset time. Child Development, 57, 628-635.
4. Etymotic Research. (2001). QuickSIN Speech-in-Noise Test (Version 1.3). Elk Grove Village, IL: Author.
5. Frank, T., & Craig, C. H. (1984). Comparison of the Auditec and Rintelmann recordings of the NU-6. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 267-271.
6. Frisina, D. R., & Frisina, R. D. (1997). Speech recognition in noise and presbycusis: Relations to possible neural mechanisms. Hearing Research, 106, 95-104.
7. Gelfand, S. A. (1998). Optimizing the reliability of speech recognition scores. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1088-1102.
8. Gelfand, S. A. (2001). Essentials of audiology (2nd ed.). New York: Thieme.
9. High, W. S., Fairbanks, G., & Glorig, A. (1964). Scale for self-assessment of hearing handicap. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 29(3), 215-230.
10. Laitakari, K. (1996). Speech recognition in noise: Development of a computerized test and preparation of test material. Scandanavian Audiology, 25, 29-34.
11. Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 40, 467-477.
12. Lord, F. M. (1952). The relation of the reliability of multiple-choice tests to the distribution of item difficulties. Psychometrika, 17, 181-194.
13. 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.
14. Maurer, J. F., & Rupp, R. R. (1979). Hearing and aging: Tactics for intervention. New York: Grune & Stratton.
15. Mendel, L. L., & Danhauer, J. L. (1997). Audiologic evaluation and management and speech perception assessment. San Diego, CA: Singular.
16. Milenkovic, P. (2000). TF32-2000 [Computer software]. Madison: University of Wisconsin.
17. Miller, G. A., & Nicely, P. E. (1955). An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 338-352.
18. Peterson, G. E., & Barney, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24, 175-184.
19. Plomp, R., & Mimpen, A. M. (1979). Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiology, 18, 43-52.
20. Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Originally published 1960)
21. Revoile, S. G., & Pickett, J. M. (1982). Speech perception by the severely hearing-impaired. In D. G. Sims, G. G. Walter, & R. L. Whitehead (Eds.), Deafness and communication: Assessment and training (pp. 25-39). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
22. Shaw, F. (1991). Descriptive IRT vs. prescriptive Rasch. Rasch Measurement, 5(1), 131.
23. Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Shankweiler, D. P. (1970). Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48, 579-594.
24. Thornton, A., & Raffin, M. (1978). Speech discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 21, 507-518.
25. Tinkelman, S. N. (1971). Planning the objective test. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., p. 63). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
26. Tyler, R. S. (1994). The use of speech-perception tests in audiological rehabilitation: Current and future research needs. In J.-P. Gagne & N. Tye-Murray (Eds.), Research in audiological rehabilitation: Current trends and future directions [Monograph Supplement]. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, 27, 47-66.
27. Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1991). BIGSTEPS: Rasch model computer program (Version 2.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: MESA Press.
28. Wright, B., & Stone, M. (1991). Separation statistics (Research Primer No. 1). Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.