HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Beltyukova, S. A. Articles by Ellis, L. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Beltyukova, S. A. Articles by Ellis, L. W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Rasch Analysis of Word Identification and Magnitude Estimation Scaling Responses in Measuring Naïve Listeners' Judgments of Speech Intelligibility of Children With Severe-to-Profound Hearing Impairments

Contact author: Lee W. Ellis, Department of Public Health and Rehabilitative Services, The University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft Street, Toledo, OH 43606. E-mail: lellis{at}utoledo.edu.

Purpose: Speech intelligibility research typically relies on traditional evidence of reliability and validity. This investigation used Rasch analysis to enhance understanding of the functioning and meaning of scores obtained with 2 commonly used procedures: word identification (WI) and magnitude estimation scaling (MES).

Method: Narrative samples of children with hearing impairments were used to collect data from listeners with no previous experience listening to or judging intelligibility of speech. WI data were analyzed with the Rasch rating scale model. MES data were examined with Rasch partial credit model when individual scales were unknown, and the Rasch rating scale model was used with reported individual scales.

Results: Results indicated that both procedures have high reliability and similar discriminatory power. However, reliability and separation were lower for MES when scales were unknown. Both procedures yielded similar speech sample ordering by their difficulty. However, sampling gaps were noted as well as item misfit issues.

Conclusions: Functioning wise, both WI and MES procedures were highly reliable in measuring speech intelligibility, and measurement precision may be increased by asking participants to report their individual scales when using MES. Meaning wise, operationalization of speech intelligibility did not change when either WI or MES procedure was used. However, the sample selection procedure needs to be further refined to allow for a wider selection of stimuli.

KEY WORDS: speech intelligibility, children with hearing loss, research data analysis and interpretation

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J. Peeters and S. Beltyukova Measuring Professionalism in Resident Physicians JAMA, February 18, 2009; 301(7): 723 - 723. [Full Text] [PDF]