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


     


American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol.15 268-277 August 2006. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2006/025)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hustad, K. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hustad, K. C.
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?

Research

A Closer Look at Transcription Intelligibility for Speakers With Dysarthria: Evaluation of Scoring Paradigms and Linguistic Errors Made by Listeners

Katherine C. Hustad
University of Wisconsin—Madison

Contact author: Katherine C. Hustad, 475 Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 1500 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705. E-mail: kchustad{at}wisc.edu

PURPOSE: This study addressed the effects of 3 different paradigms for scoring orthographic transcriptions of dysarthric speech on intelligibility scores. The study also examined whether there were differences in transcription accuracy among words from different linguistic classes.

METHOD: Speech samples were collected from 12 speakers with dysarthria of varying severity. Twelve different listeners made orthographic transcriptions of each speaker, for a total of 144 listeners. Transcriptions were scored using 3 different paradigms: total word phonemic match, informational word phonemic match, and informational word semantic match. Transcriptions were also coded into 3 linguistic categories: content words, modifiers, and functors. The number of words that each listener transcribed correctly within each category was tallied.

RESULTS: There were significant differences among the 3 scoring paradigms. However, the magnitude of differences was relatively small. In addition, listeners transcribed functor words more accurately than content words or modifiers. They also transcribed free morphemes more accurately than bound morphemes.

CONCLUSIONS: The specific scoring paradigm that clinicians employ for measuring speech intelligibility appears to be relatively inconsequential as long as consistent procedures are used. Analyses of the kinds of words that listeners transcribe correctly suggest that interventions focusing on listener processing strategies should be considered for enhancing intelligibility of speakers with chronic dysarthria.

Key Words: speech intelligibility, speech perception, dysarthria, cerebral palsy


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?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.