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


     


Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.41 1088-1102 October 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 Gelfand, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gelfand, S. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Optimizing the Reliability of Speech Recognition Scores

Stanley A. Gelfand 1
1 Queens College and the Graduate School of the City University of New York

sagelfand{at}qc.edu

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.

KEY WORDS: speech recognition, speech recognition testing, reliability, phonemic scoring, binomial model

Submitted on February 20, 1998
Accepted on July 23, 1998


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JSLHRHome page
E. Carney and R. S. Schlauch
Critical Difference Table for Word Recognition Testing Derived Using Computer Simulation
J Speech Lang Hear Res, October 1, 2007; 50(5): 1203 - 1209.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [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.