The relationship between listener comprehension and intelligibility scores for speakers with dysarthria.

PURPOSE This study examined the relationship between listener comprehension and intelligibility scores for speakers with mild, moderate, severe, and profound dysarthria. Relationships were examined across all speakers and their listeners when severity effects were statistically controlled, within severity groups, and within individual speakers with dysarthria. METHOD Speech samples were collected from 12 speakers with dysarthria secondary to cerebral palsy. For each speaker, 12 different listeners completed 2 tasks (for a total of 144 listeners): One task involved making orthographic transcriptions, and 1 task involved answering comprehension questions. Transcriptions were scored for the number of words transcribed correctly. Responses to comprehension questions were scored on a 3-point scale according to their accuracy. RESULTS Across all speakers, the Pearson product-moment correlation between comprehension and intelligibility scores was nonsignificant when the effects of severity were factored out and residual scores were examined. Within severity groups, the same relationship was significant only for the mild group. Within individual speaker groups, the relationship was nonsignificant for all but 2 speakers with dysarthria. Percentage of correct scores for listener comprehension was descriptively higher than percentage of correct intelligibility scores for all groups. CONCLUSION Findings suggest that transcription intelligibility scores do not accurately reflect listener comprehension scores. Measures of both intelligibility and listener comprehension may provide a more complete description of the information-bearing capability of dysarthric speech than either measure alone.

[1]  A. Stuart,et al.  Non-Parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. , 1957 .

[2]  COMPARATIVE INTELLIGIBILITY OF WORD LISTS AND CONTINUOUS DISCOURSE. , 1963, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  R S TIKOFSKY,et al.  INTELLIGIBILITY MEASURES OF DYSARTHRIC SPEECH. , 1964, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  R. Kirk Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences , 1970 .

[5]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[6]  D R Beukelman,et al.  The relationship between information transfer and speech intelligibility of dysarthric speakers. , 1979, Journal of communication disorders.

[7]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Strategies of discourse comprehension , 1983 .

[8]  Clinical Research in Communicative Disorders: Principles and Strategies , 1988 .

[9]  Raymond D. Kent,et al.  Toward phonetic intelligibility testing in dysarthria. , 1989, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[10]  G. Murphy The Psycholinguistics of Discourse Comprehension , 1990 .

[11]  T. Pring,et al.  The use of strategies to increase speech intelligibility in cerebral palsy: an experimental evaluation. , 1991, The British journal of disorders of communication.

[12]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  A cognitive architecture for comprehension. , 1992 .

[13]  Gary Weismer,et al.  3. Acoustic and perceptual approaches to the study of intelligibility , 1992 .

[14]  D. Jeffery Higginbotham,et al.  Discourse comprehension of synthetic speech delivered at normal and slow presentation rates , 1994 .

[15]  Roger E. Kirk,et al.  Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). , 1995 .

[16]  Julie M. Liss,et al.  The role of listener familiarity in the perception of dysarthric speech , 1995 .

[17]  M. Cannito,et al.  Influence of verbal and nonverbal contexts on the sentence intelligibility of a speaker with dysarthria. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[18]  Kathryn M. Yorkston,et al.  Comprehensibility of Dysarthric Speech , 1996 .

[19]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Discourse comprehension. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[20]  Kathryn M. Yorkston,et al.  Management of motor speech discorders in children and adults , 1999 .

[21]  S. Spitzer,et al.  Lexical boundary error analysis in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Altmann GTM The language machine: psycholinguistics in review. , 2001, British journal of psychology.

[23]  K. Hustad,et al.  Effects of linguistic cues and stimulus cohesion on intelligibility of severely dysarthric speech. , 2001, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[24]  David R Beukelman,et al.  Listener comprehension of severely dysarthric speech: effects of linguistic cues and stimulus cohesion. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[25]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  Quantitative Cognitive Models of Text and Discourse Processing , 2003 .

[26]  K. Hustad,et al.  Effects of presentation mode and repeated familiarization on intelligibility of dysarthric speech. , 2003, American journal of speech-language pathology.

[27]  Kirsten R. Butcher Ma,et al.  Text Comprehension and Discourse Processing , 2003 .

[28]  Rhonda Carlson,et al.  Improving Intelligibility of Speakers with Profound Dysarthria and Cerebral Palsy , 2003 .

[29]  K. Hustad,et al.  Implementing speech supplementation strategies: effects on intelligibility and speech rate of individuals with chronic severe dysarthria. , 2003, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[30]  K. Yorkston,et al.  Speech intelligibility in ALS and HD dysarthria: the everyday listener's perspective , 2005 .

[31]  K. Hustad A closer look at transcription intelligibility for speakers with dysarthria: evaluation of scoring paradigms and linguistic errors made by listeners. , 2006, American journal of speech-language pathology.