A Picture Identification Task as an Estimate of the Word-Recognition Performance of Nonverbal Adults

1980 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
June K. Antablin
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Test Word ◽  
Stimulus Presentation ◽  
Identification Task ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Northwestern University ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Picture Identification

The Picture Identification Task was developed to estimate the word-recognition performance of nonverbal adults. Four lists of 50 monosyllabic words each were assembled and recorded. Each test word and three rhyming alternatives were illustrated and photographed in a quadrant arrangement. The task of the patient was to point to the picture representing the recorded word that was presented through the earphone. In the first experiment with young adults, no significant differences were found between the Picture Identification Task and the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 materials in an open-set response paradigm. In the second experiment, the Picture Identification Task with the picture-pointing response was compared with the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in both an open-set and a closed-set response paradigm. The results from this experiment demonstrated significant differences among the three response tasks. The easiest task was a closed-set response to words, the next was a closed-set response to pictures, and the most difficult task was an open-set response. At high stimulus-presentation levels, however, the three tasks produced similar results. Finally, the clinical use of the Picture Identification Task is described along with preliminary results obtained from 30 patients with various communicative impairments.

Performance Over Time of Congenitally Deaf and Postlingually Deafened Children Using a Multichannel Cochlear Implant

1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 913-920 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly Fryauf-Bertschy ◽  
Richard S. Tyler ◽  
Danielle M. Kelsay ◽  
Bruce J. Gantz
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Northwestern University ◽  
Identification Test ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Over Time

The speech perception performance of 10 congenitally deaf and 3 postlingually deafened children who received the Cochlear Corporation multichannel cochlear implant was examined and compared. The children were tested preimplant and at 6-month intervals up to 2 years using the Monosyllable-Trochee-Spondee test (MTS), the Word Intelligibility by Picture Identification test (WIPI), and Phonetically Balanced Kindergarten (PB-K) or Northwestern University List 6 (NU-6) word lists. The postlingually deafened children exhibited significantly improved performance on open- and closed-set tests of word recognition after 6 months of implant use, a pattern similar to that of postlingually deafened adult implant users. In contrast, the congenitally deaf children did not exhibit measurably improved performance on speech perception tests until after 12 months or more of implant use. With as much as 18–24 months of use, however, some congenitally deaf children demonstrated limited open-set word recognition.

A Multimedia Approach for Estimating Speech Recognition of Multilingual Clients

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
June Antablin McCullough ◽  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Jonathan D. Birck ◽  
Linda G. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Performance Data ◽  
Multimedia Technology ◽  
Identification Task ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Cd Rom ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Computer Controlled ◽  
Visual Materials ◽  
Picture Identification

Spanish picture-identification materials have been created specifically for presentation in a computer-driven multimedia format. Normative performance data in conventional oral, open-set conditions and in computer-controlled pointing, closed-set conditions are being established for the Spanish Picture-Identification Task and will be forthcoming. The use of auditory/visual materials in the computer-controlled format represents an innovative use of multimedia technology that appears to be uniquely applicable for assessing the growing numbers of multilingual clients. It is reasonable to expect that word lists and corresponding illustrations will be developed soon for many common languages, perhaps stored on CD-ROM and accessed by audiologists through the touch of a button.

Audiological Assessment of Word Recognition Skills in Persons With Aphasia

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Zhang ◽  
Sheila R. Pratt ◽  
Patrick J. Doyle ◽  
Malcolm R. McNeil ◽  
John D. Durrant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Verbal Response ◽  
Identification Task ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Picture Identification

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of persons with aphasia, with and without hearing loss, to complete a commonly used open-set word recognition test that requires a verbal response. Furthermore, phonotactic probabilities and neighborhood densities of word recognition errors were assessed to explore potential underlying linguistic complexities that might differentially influence performance among groups. Method Four groups of adult participants were tested: participants with no brain injury with normal hearing, participants with no brain injury with hearing loss, participants with brain injury with aphasia and normal hearing, and participants with brain injury with aphasia and hearing loss. The Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (NU-6; Tillman & Carhart, 1966) was administered. Those participants who were unable to respond orally (repeating words as heard) were assessed with the Picture Identification Task (Wilson & Antablin, 1980), permitting a picture-pointing response instead. Error patterns from the NU-6 were assessed to determine whether phonotactic probability influenced performance. Results All participants with no brain injury and 72.7% of the participants with aphasia (24 out of 33) completed the NU-6. Furthermore, all participants who were unable to complete the NU-6 were able to complete the Picture Identification Task. There were significant group differences on NU-6 performance. The 2 groups with normal hearing had significantly higher scores than the 2 groups with hearing loss, but the 2 groups with normal hearing and the 2 groups with hearing loss did not differ from one another, implying that their performance was largely determined by hearing loss rather than by brain injury or aphasia. The neighborhood density, but not phonotactic probabilities, of the participants' errors differed across groups with and without aphasia. Conclusions Because the vast majority of the participants with aphasia examined could be tested readily using an instrument such as the NU-6, clinicians should not be reticent to use this test if patients are able to repeat single words, but routine use of alternative tests is encouraged for populations of people with brain injuries.

Diagnostic Precision of Open-Set Versus Closed-Set Word Recognition Testing

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 2035-2047
Author(s):  
Tzu-Ling J. Yu ◽  
Robert S. Schlauch
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Sine Wave ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Average Data ◽  
Degraded Speech ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Recognition Testing

Purpose The aim of the study was to examine the precision of forced-choice (closed-set) and open-ended (open-set) word recognition (WR) tasks for identifying a change in hearing. Method WR performance for closed-set (4 and 6 choices) and open-set tasks was obtained from 70 listeners with normal hearing. Speech recognition was degraded by presenting monosyllabic words in noise (−8, −4, 0, and 4 signal-to-noise ratios) or processed by a sine wave vocoder (2, 4, 6, and 8 channels). Results The 2 degraded speech understanding conditions yielded similarly shaped, monotonically increasing psychometric functions with the closed-set tasks having shallower slopes and higher scores than the open-set task for the same listening condition. Fitted psychometric functions to the average data were the input to a computer simulation conducted to assess the ability of each task to identify a change in hearing. Individual data were also analyzed using 95% confidence intervals for significant changes in scores for words and phonemes. These analyses found the following for the most to least efficient condition: open-set (phoneme), open-set (word), closed-set (6 choices), and closed-set (4 choices). Conclusions Closed-set WR testing has distinct advantages for implementation, but its poorer precision for identifying a change than open-set WR testing must be considered.

scholarly journals Effects of the Carrier Phrase on Word Recognition Performances by Younger and Older Listeners Using Two Stimulus Paradigms

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (06) ◽  
pp. 412-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Victoria A. Sanchez
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Target Word ◽  
Speaker Recognition ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Test Word ◽  
Root Mean Square Amplitude ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Background In the 1950s, with monitored live voice testing, the vu meter time constant and the short durations and amplitude modulation characteristics of monosyllabic words necessitated the use of the carrier phrase amplitude to monitor (indirectly) the presentation level of the words. This practice continues with recorded materials. To relieve the carrier phrase of this function, first the influence that the carrier phrase has on word recognition performance needs clarification, which is the topic of this study. Purpose Recordings of Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 by two female speakers were used to compare word recognition performances with and without the carrier phrases when the carrier phrase and test word were (1) in the same utterance stream with the words excised digitally from the carrier (VA-1 speaker) and (2) independent of one another (VA-2 speaker). The 50-msec segment of the vowel in the target word with the largest root mean square amplitude was used to equate the target word amplitudes. Research Design A quasi-experimental, repeated measures design was used. Study Sample Twenty-four young normal-hearing adults (YNH; M = 23.5 years; pure-tone average [PTA] = 1.3-dB HL) and 48 older hearing loss listeners (OHL; M = 71.4 years; PTA = 21.8-dB HL) participated in two, one-hour sessions. Data Collection and Analyses Each listener had 16 listening conditions (2 speakers × 2 carrier phrase conditions × 4 presentation levels) with 100 randomized words, 50 different words by each speaker. Each word was presented 8 times (2 carrier phrase conditions × 4 presentation levels [YNH, 0- to 24-dB SL; OHL, 6- to 30-dB SL]). The 200 recorded words for each condition were randomized as 8, 25-word tracks. In both test sessions, one practice track was followed by 16 tracks alternated between speakers and randomized by blocks of the four conditions. Central tendency and repeated measures analyses of variance statistics were used. Results With the VA-1 speaker, the overall mean recognition performances were 6.0% (YNH) and 8.3% (OHL) significantly better with the carrier phrase than without the carrier phrase. These differences were in part attributed to the distortion of some words caused by the excision of the words from the carrier phrases. With the VA-2 speaker, recognition performances on the with and without carrier phrase conditions by both listener groups were not significantly different, except for one condition (YNH listeners at 8-dB SL). The slopes of the mean functions were steeper for the YNH listeners (3.9%/dB to 4.8%/dB) than for the OHL listeners (2.4%/dB to 3.4%/dB) and were <1%/dB steeper for the VA-1 speaker than for the VA-2 speaker. Although the mean results were clear, the variability in performance differences between the two carrier phrase conditions for the individual participants and for the individual words was striking and was considered in detail. Conclusion The current data indicate that word recognition performances with and without the carrier phrase (1) were different when the carrier phrase and target word were produced in the same utterance with poorer performances when the target words were excised from their respective carrier phrases (VA-1 speaker), and (2) were the same when the carrier phrase and target word were produced as independent utterances (VA-2 speaker).

A Comparison of Recognition Performances in Speech-Spectrum Noise by Listeners with Normal Hearing on PB-50, CID W-22, NU–6, W-1 Spondaic Words, and Monosyllabic Digits Spoken by the Same Speaker

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (06) ◽  
pp. 496-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Rachel McArdle ◽  
Heidi Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Psychometric Characteristics ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Word Lists ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Speech Spectrum

Background: So that portions of the classic Miller, Heise, and Lichten (1951) study could be replicated, new recorded versions of the words and digits were made because none of the three common monosyllabic word lists (PAL PB-50, CID W-22, and NU–6) contained the 9 monosyllabic digits (1–10, excluding 7) that were used by Miller et al. It is well established that different psychometric characteristics have been observed for different lists and even for the same materials spoken by different speakers. The decision was made to record four lists of each of the three monosyllabic word sets, the monosyllabic digits not included in the three sets of word lists, and the CID W-1 spondaic words. A professional female speaker with a General American dialect recorded the materials during four recording sessions within a 2-week interval. The recording order of the 582 words was random. Purpose: To determine—on listeners with normal hearing—the psychometric properties of the five speech materials presented in speech-spectrum noise. Research Design: A quasi-experimental, repeated-measures design was used. Study Sample: Twenty-four young adult listeners (M = 23 years) with normal pure-tone thresholds (≤20-dB HL at 250 to 8000 Hz) participated. The participants were university students who were unfamiliar with the test materials. Data Collection and Analysis: The 582 words were presented at four signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs; −7-, −2-, 3-, and 8-dB) in speech-spectrum noise fixed at 72-dB SPL. Although the main metric of interest was the 50% point on the function for each word established with the Spearman-Kärber equation (Finney, 1952), the percentage correct on each word at each SNR was evaluated. The psychometric characteristics of the PB-50, CID W-22, and NU–6 monosyllabic word lists were compared with one another, with the CID W-1 spondaic words, and with the 9 monosyllabic digits. Results: Recognition performance on the four lists within each of the three monosyllabic word materials were equivalent, ±0.4 dB. Likewise, word-recognition performance on the PB-50, W-22, and NU–6 word lists were equivalent, ±0.2 dB. The mean recognition performance at the 50% point with the 36 W-1 spondaic words was ˜6.2 dB lower than the 50% point with the monosyllabic words. Recognition performance on the monosyllabic digits was 1–2 dB better than mean performance on the monosyllabic words. Conclusions: Word-recognition performances on the three sets of materials (PB-50, CID W-22, and NU–6) were equivalent, as were the performances on the four lists that make up each of the three materials. Phonetic/phonemic balance does not appear to be an important consideration in the compilation of word-recognition lists used to evaluate the ability of listeners to understand speech.A companion paper examines the acoustic, phonetic/phonological, and lexical variables that may predict the relative ease or difficulty for which these monosyllable words were recognized in noise (McArdle and Wilson, this issue).

Word Recognition in Multitalker Babble Measured with Two Psychophysical Methods

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (08) ◽  
pp. 622-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Christopher A. Burks ◽  
Deborah G. Weakley
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Random Presentation ◽  
Presentation Level ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Northwestern University ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship

The purpose of this experiment was to determine the relationship between psychometric functions for words presented in multitalker babble using a descending presentation level protocol and a random presentation level protocol. Forty veterans (mean = 63.5 years) with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing losses were enrolled. Seventy of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 words spoken by the VA female speaker were presented at seven signal-to-babble ratios from 24 to 0 dB (10 words/step). Although the random procedure required 69 sec longer to administer than the descending protocol, there was no significant difference between the results obtained with the two psychophysical methods. There was almost no relation between the perceived ability of the listeners to understand speech in background noise and their measured ability to understand speech in multitalker babble. Likewise, there was a tenuous relation between pure-tone thresholds and performance on the words in babble and between recognition performance in quiet and performance on the words in babble.

Modeling closed‐set phoneme and open‐set word recognition by multi‐channel cochlear implant users

1999 ◽  
Vol 106 (4) ◽  
pp. 2177-2177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted A. Meyer ◽  
Mario A. Svirsky ◽  
Stefan Frisch ◽  
Adam R. Kaiser ◽  
David B. Pisoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Open Set

scholarly journals Recognition of Synthetic Speech by Hearing-Impaired Elderly Listeners

1991 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1180-1184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Kathleen J. Nelson ◽  
David B. Pisoni
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
The Other ◽  
Natural Speech ◽  
Synthetic Speech ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Open Set

The Modified Rhyme Test (MRT), recorded using natural speech and two forms of synthetic speech, DECtalk and Votrax, was used to measure both open-set and closed-set speech-recognition performance. Performance of hearing-impaired elderly listeners was compared to two groups of young normal-hearing adults, one listening in quiet, and the other listening in a background of spectrally shaped noise designed to simulate the peripheral hearing loss of the elderly. Votrax synthetic speech yielded significant decrements in speech recognition compared to either natural or DECtalk synthetic speech for all three subject groups. There were no differences in performance between natural speech and DECtalk speech for the elderly hearing-impaired listeners or the young listeners with simulated hearing loss. The normal-hearing young adults listening in quiet out-performed both of the other groups, but there were no differences in performance between the young listeners with simulated hearing loss and the elderly hearing-impaired listeners. When the closed-set identification of synthetic speech was compared to its open-set recognition, the hearing-impaired elderly gained as much from the reduction in stimulus/response uncertainty as the two younger groups. Finally, among the elderly hearing-impaired listeners, speech-recognition performance was correlated negatively with hearing sensitivity, but scores were correlated positively among the different talker conditions. Those listeners with the greatest hearing loss had the most difficulty understanding speech and those having the most trouble understanding natural speech also had the greatest difficulty with synthetic speech.

Performance of Some of the Better Cochlear-Implant Patients

1989 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 887-911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Tyler ◽  
Brian C. J. Moore ◽  
Francis K. Kuk
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Scaling Analysis ◽  
Gap Detection ◽  
Environmental Sound ◽  
Sound Perception ◽  
Detection Thresholds ◽  
Closed Set ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Wide Range

The main purpose of this study was to provide an independent corroboration of open-set word recognition in some of the better cochlear-implant patients. These included the Chorimac, Nucleus (one group from the U.S.A. and one group from Hannover, Germany), Symbion, Duren/Cologne and 3M/Vienna implants. Three experiments are reported: (1) word recognition in word lists and in sentences; (2) environmental sound perception, and (3) gap detection. On word recognition, the scores of 6 Chorimac patients averaged 2.5% words and 0.7% words in sentences correct in the French tests. In the German tests, the scores averaged 17% words and 10% words in sentences for 10 Duren/Cologne patients, 15% words and 16% words in sentences for 9 3M/Vienna patients, and 10% words and 16% words in sentences (3% to 26%) for 10 Nucleus/Hannover patients. In the English tests, the scores averaged 11% words and 29.6% words in sentences for l0 Nucleus-U.S.A. patients, and 13.7% words and 35.7% words in sentences for the 9 Symbion patients. The ability to recognize recorded environmental sounds was measured with a closed set of 18 sounds. Performance averaged 23% correct for Chorimac patients, 41% correct for 3M/Vienna patients, 44% correct for Nucleus/Hannover patients, 21% correct for Duren/Cologne patients, 58% correct for Nucleus/U.S.A. patients, and 83% correct for Symbion patients. A multidimensional scaling analysis suggested that patients were, in part, utilizing information about the envelope and about the periodic/aperiodic nature of some of the sounds. Gap detection thresholds with a one-octave wide noise centered at 500 Hz varied widely among patients. Typically, patients with gap thresholds less than 40 ms showed a wide range of performance on speech perception tasks, whereas patients with gap-detection thresholds greater than 40 ms showed poor word recognition skills.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document