Literature DB >> 9771631

Optimizing the reliability of speech recognition scores.

S A Gelfand1.   

Abstract

Speech recognition assessment involves a dilemma because clinicians want a test that is short and reliable, but statistical principles dictate that a short test is unreliable. Curves representing the variability of test scores based on the binomial model reveal that approximately 450 scorable items are needed in order to optimize the reliability of a speech recognition test. A testing approach was developed to achieve this sample size while retaining the principal features of the most commonly accepted speech recognition tests (i.e., monosyllabic words presented in an open-set format, verbal responses, and right/wrong scoring). It involves the use of an interactive computer program to present CNC words in 50 three-word groups, which are scored phonemically, resulting in 450 scorable items. Normal performance is described as a function of both presentation level and signal-to-noise ratio. Comparisons of test and retest scores for 100 individuals with normal hearing and 100 persons with sensorineural losses revealed that the approach achieves the degree of reliability predicted by the binomial model for both groups. Phoneme scores accounted for 99% of the variance of word scores for most of the performance range encountered in clinical practice, making it possible for test outcomes based on phonemic scoring to be expressed in terms of equivalent word recognition scores.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9771631     DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4105.1088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  10 in total

1.  Speech evoked auditory brainstem responses: a new tool to study brainstem encoding of speech sounds.

Authors:  Sujeet Kumar Sinha; Vijayalakshmi Basavaraj
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-01-11

2.  Effects of open-set and closed-set task demands on spoken word recognition.

Authors:  Cynthia G Clopper; David B Pisoni; Adam T Tierney
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Effects of reverberation on speech recognition in stationary and modulated noise by school-aged children and young adults.

Authors:  Marcin Wróblewski; Dawna E Lewis; Daniel L Valente; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Testing Speech Recognition in Spanish-English Bilingual Children with the Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment (CASPA): Initial Report.

Authors:  Paula B García; Lydia Rosado Rogers; Kanae Nishi
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Variability of word discrimination scores in clinical practice and consequences on their sensitivity to hearing loss.

Authors:  Annie Moulin; André Bernard; Laurent Tordella; Judith Vergne; Annie Gisbert; Christian Martin; Céline Richard
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Performance-intensity functions for normal-hearing adults and children using computer-aided speech perception assessment.

Authors:  Ryan McCreery; Rindy Ito; Merry Spratford; Dawna Lewis; Brenda Hoover; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Does Sentence-Level Coarticulation Affect Speech Recognition in Noise or a Speech Masker?

Authors:  Brandi Jett; Emily Buss; Virginia Best; Jacob Oleson; Lauren Calandruccio
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 8.  Variations in the slope of the psychometric functions for speech intelligibility: a systematic survey.

Authors:  Alexandra MacPherson; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 3.293

9.  Chance-level hit rates in closed-set, forced-choice audiometry and a novel utility for the significance test-based detection of malingering.

Authors:  Thomas Steffens; Lisa M Steffens; Steven C Marcrum
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The Thomas More Lists: A Phonemically Balanced Dutch Monosyllabic Speech Audiometry Test.

Authors:  Filiep Vanpoucke; Marleen De Sloovere; Anke Plasmans
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2022-07-29
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.