Phoneme errors on a nonsense syllable test

S. B. Resnick, J. R. Dubno, S. Hoffnung, and H. Levitt

Citation: 58, S114 (1975); doi: 10.1121/1.2001878

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2001878
View Table of Contents: http://asa.scitation.org/toc/jas/58/S1
Published by the Acoustical Society of America
S114 90th Meeting:AcousticalSocietyof America
11:30
BBB16. Intelligibility of speechwith simulated single reflec-
tion for normal and hearing-impaired subjects. Anna K.
Nabelek, Elizabeth Slawinska, and Larry N. Robinette
(Audiology and Speech Pathology Department, University of
Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37916)
Simulated reflection was produced by a computer as a de-
layed form of the speech material (Modified Rhyme Test).
The delays were 0, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, and 160 msec. The
signals were fed separately into two loudspeakers, positioned
in a sound-insulated booth 6 ft in front of a subject and form-
ing a 60ø angle. The intelligibility was tested with five to nine
normal and hearing-impaired subjects in binaural and monaural
conditions with masking noise (babble of eight voices) reducing
intelligibility to about 75%. The intelligibility of normals did
not change up to 20-msec delay and decreased for longer de-
lays for both conditions. Scores were lower for monaural
listening. Such an advantage for binaural listening was not
observed for the impaired listeners. In both conditions, their
intelligibility decreased gradually as the duration increased.
The lack of plateau in the impaired subjects' results might
indicate that any reflected energy in reverberant rooms is
harmful for their intelligibility. Normals, however, might
benefit from early reflections. [Supportedby NIH NISND
grant 1 R01 NS 10962-01. ]
11:40
BBB17. Speech reception threshold testing materials. R.A.
Campbell (Speech Communication Department, State University
of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14226)
This study was carried out to increase the number of sponda-
ic words available for speech reception threshold testing. Al-
though recent trends in clinical speech reception testing has
been toward use of small lists of spondaic words, with which
the testee has been familiarized, it was felt that the general
utility of such testing would be improved by having available
a larger number of words which could be used for extensive
testing without having to repeat. Particular attention was
paid to the intelligibility of these additional words as com-
pared to CID Auditory Tests W-1 and W-2. Thirty words
from an experimental list of 250 spondaic words were admin-
istered to a total of 84 clinical patients at their previously
established speech reception threshold. From the data, a total
of 150 new spondaic words, arranged in five 30 word lists,
were obtained which appear to be more homogeneous in intelli-
gibility than the CID lists.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 58, Suppl. No. 1, Fall 1975
S114
11:50
BBB18. Analysis of recognition scores of hearing-impaired
subjectsusing Pairbanks Rhyme Test. B. Franklin (Depart-
ment of Special Education, San Francisco State University,
San Francisco, CA 94132)
The five lists of the Fairbanks Rhyme Test were presented
to the better ear of 12 teeffagers with bilateral, congenital,
moderate to profound sensorineural hearing losses at 20 dB
above theft speech reception thresholds. Analysis of the recog-
nition scores for each consonant for all subjects revealed that
the/s/score of 69% was the highest. The average score for
alveolars /d/ and /t/ of 49% was almost double the average
score for labials/b/and/p/ of 25%. The relatively high
scores for/s/, /d/, and/t/, and low scores for/b/and/p/
are different from what one would expect on basis of subjects'
audiograms in relation to acoustic energy in these consonants.
There was an unexpected variation in the number of times
the same consonant was correctly identified on different lists,
for example, /b/--eight times for list V and 21 times for
list I. There were also unexpected discrepancies in the number
of correct responsesfor certain words, for example, "fame,"
"vain," "fed," and "buck"were missedby all 12 subjects;
whereas "look" and "saw" were correctly identifiedby 11
subjects.
12:00
BBB19. Phoneme errors on a nonsense syllable test. S.B.
Resnick, J.R. Dubno, S. Hoffnung, and H. Levitt (Communi-
cation Sciences Laboratory, City University of New York
Graduate School and University Center, 33 West 42nd Street,
New York, NY 10036)
In an effort to construct a test which permits detailed analy-
sis of the phonemic errors made by naive hearing-impaired
individuals under conditions of hearing aid use, we have dev-
eloped a closed response nonsense syllable test consisting of
CV, VC, and CVC syllables organized into modules. The
modules differ with respect to the class of consonants repre-
sented, the consonant position within the syllable, and the
vowel context (/i/, /a/, or/u/). Responsesto syllables within
a given module are limited to syllables within the same module.
The response foils (which correspond to all the syllables with-
in a module) include the most frequent perceptual confusions
reported for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals.
The results of tests administered to hearing-impaired individ-
uals under difficult listening conditions indicate a pattern of
errors consistent with those reported by previous investigators,
including (1) greater errors on final than on initial conson-
ants; (2) greater errors on unvoiced than on voiced consonants;
and (3) a dependence of consonant identification on vowel
context. [Research supportedby NINCDS. ]