Standard Error Measurement in Speech Discrimination Testing

1971 ◽  
Vol 50 (1A) ◽  
pp. 146-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. L. Bode
Keyword(s):  
Standard Error ◽  
Error Measurement ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Testing

The Development of Constant Items for Speech Discrimination Testing

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 656-667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elmer Owens ◽  
Earl D. Schubert
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Test ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Response System ◽  
Speech Discrimination Test ◽  
Discrimination Testing ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Manner Of Articulation

Subjects were English-speaking adults with hearing impairment. Etiology of hearing loss did not enter into selection. Consonant errors were observed on speech discrimination test lists employing a closed-set response system. Fifteen subjects were employed for the first list and 20 each for the remaining four lists, with an occasional subject serving in more than one group. Confusions between unvoiced and voiced consonants rarely occurred; the /r/ and /l/ were seldom confused with other phonemes; and nasals were seldom confused with non-nasals. Discrimination difficulty was related to both place and manner of articulation.

Vowel Discrimination of Hearing-Impaired Listeners

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 648-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elmer Owens ◽  
Carolyn B. Talbott ◽  
Earl D. Schubert
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
General Lack ◽  
Test Items ◽  
Response System ◽  
Discrimination Testing ◽  
Vowel Discrimination

Vowel discrimination ability was observed in two groups of 20 hearing-impaired subjects each. Each group listened to a different list of closed-set test items specifically designed for the study. A surprisingly low number of errors occurred, suggesting that vowel items in general lack the efficiency required for speech discrimination testing using a closed-set response system. Among the most difficult phonemes to discriminate clearly were /ɔ I /, /ɔ/, /au/, /ε/, /o/, and /α/. The phonemes most frequently substituted in error were adjacent to the stimulus phoneme on the Formant 1 versus Formant 2 vowel charts. The /u/ was the most frequent substitution for several vowels.

scholarly journals The Estimation of Standard Error Measurement of Physics Final Examination at Senior High Schools in Bima Regency Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 1590-1594
Author(s):  
Syahrul Ramadhan ◽  
Djemari Mardapi ◽  
Chuduriah Sahabuddin ◽  
Rudy Sumiharsono
Keyword(s):  
High Schools ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Final Examination ◽  
Error Measurement

Time-Compressed Speech Discrimination in Central Auditory Disorder: A Pediatric Case Study

1977 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Lee Oelschlaeger ◽  
Daniel Orchik
Keyword(s):  
Impedance Measurement ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Time Compression ◽  
Compressed Speech ◽  
Use Of Time ◽  
Discrimination Testing ◽  
Central Auditory Function

Audiological data are presented for an 11-year-old aphasic girl with confirmed left-hemisphere damage. Pure-tone audiometry, impedance measurement, and speech discrimination testing were completed. Discrimination testing included presentation of the Word Intelligibility by Picture Identification (WIPI) test at 0 and 60% time compression. Results indicated significantly poorer speech discrimination in the ear contralateral to the site of lesion at 60% time compression. This case study supports the use of time-compressed speech discrimination testing in the assessment of central auditory function of children and as a diagnostic tool for determination of site of lesion.

Consonant Phonemic Errors Associated with Pure-Tone Configurations and Certain Kinds of Hearing Impairment

1972 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 308-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elmer Owens ◽  
Martha Benedict ◽  
Earl D. Schubert
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Frequency Range ◽  
Error Response ◽  
Probability Of Error ◽  
Discrimination Testing ◽  
Multiple Choice Items

In the course of developing multiple-choice items for speech discrimination testing, phonemic errors were observed as they relate to pure-tone configurations and to certain types of hearing impairment. For the phonemes involved, the following observations were made: (1) The /s, ∫, t∫, d 3 / and the initial /t/ and /θ/ were easily identified by patients with flat pure-tone configurations, but were difficult for patients with sharply falling slopes, 500 to 4000 Hz. (2) Identification of the /s/ and the initial /t/ and /θ/ was highly dependent upon energy in the frequency range above 2000 Hz, whereas identification of the /∫, t∫, d 3 / was highly dependent upon the range between 1000 and 2000 Hz. (3) Over all the items testing a given stimulus phoneme, the total number of phonemes employed as alternate responses ranged from three to eight, averaging five. The actual erroneous responses for any given stimulus phoneme, however, were usually limited to two or three phonemes, and these were generally the same regardless of pure-tone configuration. (4) Although the error-response phonemes were usually the same as the stimulus phoneme in manner of production, some error phonemes were produced in a different manner, but in the same place, as the stimulus phoneme. Probability of error for individual phonemes seemed to be more closely related to pure-tone configurations than to kinds of hearing impairment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document