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


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.43 1160-1167 October 2000.
© 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 Feeney, M. P.
Right arrow Articles by Hallowell, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feeney, M. P.
Right arrow Articles by Hallowell, B.
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?

Practice and List Effects on the Synthetic Sentence Identification Test in Young and Elderly Listeners

M. Patrick Feeney 1
Brooke Hallowell 1
1 Ohio University Athens, OH

feeney28{at}osu.edu

A high prevalence of central auditory processing disorders (CAPD) has been reported in the elderly based on scores for the Synthetic Sentence Identification Test (SSI). This study examined practice effects and list differences on the Auditec version of the SSI with an ipsilateral competing message in 30 young and 20 elderly participants. Results for the younger participants suggested that a minimum of one practice list should be used with the SSI, whereas results for the elderly participants suggested that a minimum of three practice lists should be used. The binomial model of A. R. Thornton and M. J. M. Raffin (1978) was suggested for use in determining the required number of lists needed to obtain reliable SSI performance. Significant list differences were found with the Auditec version of the SSI. It was recommended to use only Lists A, C, D, E, G, and I for consistent results across lists. Practice effects and list differences should be accounted for when using the SSI for the assessment of CAPD in elderly and young listeners.

KEY WORDS: aging, central auditory processing, Synthetic Sentence Identification Test, practice effects, hearing

Submitted on December 15, 1999
Accepted on June 4, 2000


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
 Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck SurgHome page
G. A. Gates, M. L. Anderson, M. P. Feeney, S. M. McCurry, and E. B. Larson
Central Auditory Dysfunction in Older Persons With Memory Impairment or Alzheimer Dementia
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, July 1, 2008; 134(7): 771 - 777.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.