Psychometrically equivalent trisyllabic words for speech reception threshold testing in Mandarin

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 44, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 391-399

  Nissen, Shawn L ^a   Harris, Richard W ^a   Jennings, Lara Jill ^a   Eggett, Dennis L ^a   Buck, Holly ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory word recognition; Chinese; Digitally recorded; Homogeneous; Logistic regression; Mandarin; Speech audiometry; Speech discrimination; Speech reception threshold; Trisyllabic

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHINESE; COMPACT DISK; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; MANDARIN; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RECORDING; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

ADULT; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; PSYCHOMETRICS; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH PRODUCTION MEASUREMENT; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST; VOCABULARY;

EID: 23844553819     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14992020500147672     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Aleksandrovsky, I.V., McCullough, J.K. & Wilson, R.H. 1998. Development of suprathreshold word recognition test for Russian-speaking patients. J Am Acad Audiol, 9, 417-425.
2. American National Standards Institute. 1999. Maximum Permissible Ambient Noise Levels for Audiometric Test Rooms. ANSI S3.1-1999. New York: ANSI.
3. American National Standards Institute. 2004. Specification for Audiometers. ANSI S3.6-2004. New York: ANSI.
4. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 1988. Guidelines for determining threshold level for speech. ASHA, 30, 85-89.
5. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 1990. Guidelines for screening for hearing impairments and middle-ear disorders. ASHA, 32, 17-24.
6. Ashoor, A.A. & Prochazka, T. 1985. Saudi Arabic speech audiometry for children. Br J Audiol, 19, 229-238.
7. Beattie, R.C., Svihovec, D.V. & Edgerton, B.J. 1975. Relative intelligibility of the CID spondees as presented via monitored live voice. J Speech Hear Disord, 40, 84-91.
8. Bell, T.S. & Wilson, R.H. 2001. Sentence recognition materials based on frequency of word use and lexical confusability. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 514-522.
9. Blarney, P.J., Pyman, B.C., Gordon, M., Clark, G.M., Brown, A.M., et al. 1992. Factors predicting postoperative sentence scores in post-linguistically deaf adult cochlear implant patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 101, 342-348.
10. Campbell, G.L. 1991. Compendium of the World's Languages. London & New York: Routledge.
11. Christensen, L.K. 1995. Performance Intensity Functions for Digitally Recorded Spanish Speech Audiometry. Master's thesis. Brigham Young University. Provo, UT.
12. Cowan, R.S., DelDot, J., Barker, E.J., Sarant, J.Z., Pegg, P., et al. 1997. Speech perception results for children with implants with different levels of preoperative residual hearing. Am J Otol, 18, S125-S126.
13. Dennis, J.M. & Neely, J.G. 1991. Basic hearing tests. Otolaryngol Clin North Am, 24, 253-276.
14. Dowell, R.C., Dettman, S.J., Hill, K., Winton, E., Barker, E.J., et al. 2002. Speech perception outcomes in older children who use multichannel cochlear implants: Older is not always poorer. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl, 189, 97-101.
15. Dowell, R.C., Mecklenburg, D.J. & Clark, G.M. 1986. Speech recognition for 40 patients receiving multichannel cochlear implants. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 112, 1054-1059.
16. Egan, J.J. 1979. Basic aspects of speech audiometry. Ear Nose Throat J, 58, 190-193.
17. Epstein, A. 1978. Speech audiometry. Otolaryngol Clin North Am, 11, 667-676.
18. Fu, Q.J., Zeng, F.G., Shannon, R.V. & Soli, S.D. 1998. Importance of tonal envelope cues in Chinese speech recognition. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 505-510.
19. Greer, L.F. 1997. Performance Intensity Functions for Digitally Recorded Italian Speech Audiometry Materials. Master's thesis. Brigham Young University. Provo, UT, USA.
20. Hagerman, B. 1984. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry. Scand Audiol Suppl, 21, 1-25.
21. Harris, R.W., Goffi, M.V.S., Pedalini, M.E.B., Gygi, M.A. & Merrill, A. 2001. Psychometrically equivalent Brazilian Portuguêse trisyllabic words spoken by male and female talkers. Pró-Fono, 13, 37-53.
22. Harris, R.W., Kim, E. & Eggett, D.L. 2003. Psychometrically equivalent Korean bisyllabic words spoken by male and female talkers. Korean J Commun Disord, 8, 217-243.
23. Harris, R.W., Nielson, W.S., McPherson, D.L., Skarzynski, H. & Eggett, D.L. 2004. Psychometrically equivalent Polish bisyllabic words spoken by male and female talkers. Audiofonologia, 25, 1-15.
24. Hirsh, I.J., Davis, H., Silverman, S.R., Reynolds, E.G., Eldert, E., et al. 1952. Development of materials for speech audiometry. J Speech Hear Disord, 17, 321-337.
25. Hood, J.D. & Poole, J.P. 1977. Improving the reliability of speech audiometry. Br J Audiol, 11, 93-101.
26. Huang, T.S., Wang, N.M. & Liu, S.Y. 1995. Tone perception of Mandarin-speaking postlingually deaf implantees using the Nucleus 22-Channel Cochlear Mini System. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl, 166, 294-298.
27. Huang, T.S., Wang, N.M. & Liu, S.Y. 1996. Nucleus 22-channel cochlear mini-system implantations in Mandarin-speaking patients. Am J Otol, 17, 46-52.
28. Hudgins, C.V., Hawkins, J.E., Karlin, J.E. & Stevens, S.S. 1947. The development of recorded auditory tests for measuring hearing loss for speech. Laryngoscope, 57, 57-89.
29. Jerger, S., Jerger, J. & Abrams, S. 1983. Speech audiometry in the young child. Ear Hear, 4, 56-66.
30. Katzner, K. 1986. The Languages of the World. London & New York: Routledge.
31. Liu, Y., Liang, N.Y., Wang, D.J., Zhang, S.Y., Yang, T.Y., et al. 1990. Dictionary of Usage Frequency of Modern Chinese Words. Beijing: Yuhang Publishing.
32. Martin, F.N. & Hart, D.B. 1978. Measurement of speech thresholds of Spanish-speaking children by non-Spanish speaking clinicians. J Speech Hear Disord, 43, 255-262.
33. Martin, F.N. & Sides, D.G. 1985. Survey of current audiometric practices. ASHA, 27, 29-36.
34. Martini, A., Mazzoli, M., Rosignoli, M., Trevisi, P., Maggi, S., et al. 2001. Hearing in the elderly: a population study. Audiology, 40, 285-293.
35. Nissen, S.L., Harris, R.W., Jennings, L., Eggett, D.L. & Buck, H. 2005. Psychometrically equivalent Mandarin bisyllabic speech discrimination materials spoken by male and female talkers. Int J Audiol, 44, 379-390.
36. Ramkissoon, I. 2001. Speech recognition thresholds for multilingual populations. Commun Disord Q, 22, 158-162.
37. Ramkissoon, I., Proctor, A., Lansing, C.R. & Bilger, R.C. 2002. Digit speech recognition thresholds (SRT) for non-native speakers of English. Am J Audiol, 11, 23-28.
38. Roup, C.M., Wiley, T.L., Safady, S.H. & Stoppenbach, D.T. 1998. Tympanometric screening norms for adults. Am J Audiol, 1, 55-60.
39. Sarant, J.Z., Blarney, P.J., Dowell, R.C., Clark, G.M. & Gibson, W.P. 2001. Variation in speech perception scores among children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 22, 18-28.
40. Studio Audio & Video Ltd. 2004. SADiE disk editor software. [5.2.2]. [Computer Program]. Ely, Cambridgeshire, UK: Studio Audio & Video Ltd.
41. Wang, Q., Gu, R., Han, D. & Yang, W. 2003. Familial auditory neuropathy. Laryngoscope, 113, 1623-1629.
42. Wang, B.K. & Huang, T.S. 1988. Current clinical results of the cochlear implant program conducted on Mandarin-speaking patients. Am J Otol, 9, 44-51.
43. Wilson, R.H. & Carter, A.S. 2001. Relation between slopes of word recognition psychometric functions and homogeneity of the stimulus materials. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 7-14.
44. Wilson, R.H., Preece, J.P. & Thornton, A.R. 1990. Clinical use of the compact disc in speech audiometry. ASHA, 32, 47, 51.
45. Wilson, R.H. & Strouse, A. 1999. Psychometrically equivalent spondaic words spoken by a female speaker. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 42, 1336-1346.
46. Young, L.L., Dudley, B. & Gunter, M.B. 1982. Thresholds and psychometric functions of the individual spondaic words. J Speech Hear Res, 25, 586-593.