JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.41 834-845 August 1998.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Amos, N. E.
Right arrow Articles by Humes, L. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Amos, N. E.
Right arrow Articles by Humes, L. E.

SCAN Test-Retest Reliability for First- and Third-Grade Children

Nathan E. Amos 1
Larry E. Humes 1

1 Indiana University Bloomington

namos{at}indiana.edu

The SCAN is a popular screening test that was developed to provide a rapidly administered, standardized method for determining the potential of central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) in children between the ages of 3 and 11 years. It can be administered in 20 minutes with a portable stereo cassette player and contains three subtests: filtered words (FW), auditory figure ground (AFG), and competing words (CW). Published SCAN test-retest reliability data (Keith, 1986) used a 6-month retest interval and indicated that SCAN scores may be unreliable. No additional reliability data are available, and studies indicate that SCAN has been used by both researchers and clinicians despite reliability concerns. This investigation examined the stability of SCAN outcomes for 25 first-grade and 22 third-grade children (ages 6 to 9 years) using a 6- to 7-week retest interval. Time of day and examiner were held constant, and participants were normal-hearing, were Caucasian, and spoke English as their primary language. ANOVA outcomes indicated that both raw and standard scores improved significantly from Test 1 to Test 2 for two of the three SCAN subtests (FW and CW) and for the composite (COMP) score. Additionally, COMP-percentile-rank and age-equivalent outcomes demonstrated significant improvement from test to retest for both grades. The AFG subtest was the only SCAN measure for which a significant test-retest difference did not emerge. The highest test-retest correlation values (r) were moderately strong (0.70lerle0.78) and occurred for the CW and COMP scores. Implications of correlations and factor analyses are discussed. It is suggested that examiners base recommendations for additional testing, follow up, and remediation on the COMP score only. Further, it appears that second administration of the SCAN can provide a better estimate of an individual child's best performance, but lack of second-score norms confounds simple interpretation of such scores.

KEY WORDS: central auditory processing disorder (CAPD), screening, children, SCAN, test-retest reliability

Submitted on August 4, 1997
Accepted on January 26, 1998




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Assessment for Effective InterventionHome page
M. Jerger
The Phoneme Perception Task (PPT): A Measure of Phoneme Perception in Orally Read Sentences
Assessment for Effective Intervention, April 1, 1998; 23(3): 123 - 139.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.