The Development of Recorded Auditory Tests for Measuring Hearing Loss for Speech
(Impact Factor: 2.14).
01/1947; 57(1):57-89. DOI: 10.1288/00005537-194701000-00005
Available from: Tanya Hanekom
- "In 2006, the author generated a list of English spondaic words following Hudgins et al.'s (1947) guidelines. These words were selected from common everyday South African English words (Durrant, 2006). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The home language of most audiologists in South Africa is either English or Afrikaans, whereas most South Africans speak an African language as their home language. The use of an English wordlist, the South African Spondaic (SAS) wordlist, which is familiar to the English Second Language (ESL) population, was developed by the author for testing the speech recognition threshold (SRT) of ESL speakers.
The aim of this study was to compare the pure-tone average (PTA)/SRT correlation results of ESL participants when using the SAS wordlist (list A) and the CID W-1 spondaic wordlist (list B - less familiar; list C - more familiar CID W-1 words).
A mixed-group correlational, quantitative design was adopted. PTA and SRT measurements were compared for lists A, B and C for 101 (197 ears) ESL participants with normal hearing or a minimal hearing loss (<26 dBHL; mean age 33.3).
The Pearson correlation analysis revealed a strong PTA/SRT correlation when using list A (right 0.65; left 0.58) and list C (right 0.63; left 0.56). The use of list B revealed weak correlations (right 0.30; left 0.32). Paired sample t-tests indicated a statistically significantly stronger PTA/SRT correlation when list A was used, rather than list B or list C, at a 95% level of confidence.
The use of the SAS wordlist yielded a stronger PTA/SRT correlation than the use of the CID W-1 wordlist, when performing SRT testing on South African ESL speakers with normal hearing, or minimal hearing loss (<26 dBHL).
The South African journal of communication disorders. Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings 02/2015; 62(1). DOI:10.4102/sajcd.v62i1.97
Available from: kb.osu.edu
- "Additionally, the majority of psychophysical studies on vestibular function in humans with normal vestibular abilities have focused on detection thresholds (Benson, Hutt, & Brown, 1989; Gianna, Heimbrand, & Gresty, 1996; Grabherr, Nicoucar, Mast, & Merfeld, 2008) although recently there has been more research dedicated to evaluating discrimination thresholds (MacNeilage, Banks, DeAngelis, & Angelaki, 2010; Mallery et al., 2010). The finding in the present study that more information was provided by the addition of discrimination thresholds, in tandem with detection thresholds, has been welldocumented in previous studies of auditory function (Erber, 1982; Hudgins, Hawkins, Kaklin, & Stevens, 1947;Thibodeau, 2007). To truly evaluate a person's auditory ability, it is important to not only obtain a person's detection thresholds across a range of frequencies, but also to measure how the person is able to use those thresholds to understand more real-world applicable stimuli, such as a speech stimulus. "
Available from: Ishara Ramkissoon
- "Researchers continue to regard all four criteria as relevant and necessary for every speech test (Knight, 1997). However, the present data set, albeit small, are consistent with the trend of previous research suggesting that all four criteria might not be necessary for the speech threshold measurement (Fletcher, 1929; Harris, 1948; Hudgins et al., 1947). This trend has implications for the development of speech threshold tests in English and other languages and should be further evaluated in clinical practice and future research. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although Central Institute for the Deaf (CID) W-1 stimuli are routinely used for speech recognition threshold (SRT) testing, they are not always familiar to new learners of English and often lead to erroneous assessments. To improve test accuracy, alternative stimuli were constructed by pairing familiar English digits. These digit pairs were used to measure SRT for 12 non-native speakers of English and 12 native speakers of English. Results indicate that digit pairs effectively measure SRT for both participant groups; and more importantly, for non-native speakers of English, digit pairs are more accurate than CID W-1 words in measuring the hearing threshold for speech. Digit-pairs have cross-linguistic appeal and should greatly facilitate accurate SRT testing for listeners with minimal exposure to English.
American Journal of Audiology 07/2002; 11(1):23-8. DOI:10.1044/1059-0889(2002/005) · 1.28 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.