Research Article

Determination of appropriate compression rate for developing the Persian version of time compressed sentence test

Abstract

Background and Aim: Time compressed speech test is one of the most useful monaural tests for evaluation of central auditory processing disorder. For developing the time compressed sentences test, the compression rate of the sentences must be set so that the average speech comprehension score is about 90% in normal individuals and can challenge central auditory processing system sufficiently so subjects with auditory processing disorders could be identified. Therefore, the aim of the present study was finding the appropriate compression rate for developing compressed sentences test in Persian.
Method: Initially, two 10-sentence lists were prepared based on the experts’ opinion and were compressed by the amount of 60, 65, 70, 75 and 80% using Praat software. Compressed sentences were tested on twelve 18–25 year-old normal individuals and the speech comprehension score in different compression rates was compared and the compression rate in which the average score was approximately 90% was reported as an appropriate compression rate for developing time compressed sentences test in Persian.
Results: 70% compression rate was able to create an average score of 95.27% (± 3.31) and 93.6% (± 7.17) in the right and left ear, respectively.
Conclusion: Results showed that the compre­ssion rate of 70% was appropriate rate for developing the test in the Persian language.

1. Medwetsky L. Mechanisms underlying central auditory processing. In: Katz J, Medwetsky L, Burkard R, Hood L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6 th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 712-25.
2. Lau CTL, McPherson B, Fuente A. Cantonese time-compressed speech test: normative values for young adults. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing. 2012;15(3):197-210. doi: 10.1179/136132812805253587
3. Baran J. Test battery considerations. In: Musiek FE, Chermak GD, editors. Handbook of (central) auditory processing disorder. 1st ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing Inc; 2007. p. 291-324.
4. Keith RW. Diagnosing (central) auditory processing disorder in children. In: Roeser RJ, Valente M, Hosford-Dunn H, editors. Audiology diagnosis. 2 th ed. New York: Thieme; 2007. p. 335-55.
5. Garvey WD. The intelligibility of speeded speech. J Exp Psychol. 1953;45(2):102-8.
6. Beasley D, Freeman B. Time-altered speech as a measure of central auditory processing. In : Keith R. 1st ed . Central Auditory Dysfunction. New York: Grune & Stratton.1977.p.129-76.
7. Rabelo CM, Schochat E. Time-compressed speech test in Brazilian Portuguese. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2007;62(3):261-72 . DOI: 10.1590/s1807-59322007000300010
8. Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Managing central auditory processing disorders in children and youth. Am J Audiol. 1992;1(3):61-5. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889.0103.61
9. Rawool VW. Temporal processing in the auditory system. In: Geffner D, Ross-Swain D, editors. Auditory processing disorders: assessment, management and treatment. 1st ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2007. p. 227-49.
10. Krishnamurti S. Monaural low-redundancy speech tests. In: Musiek FE, Chermak GD, editors. Handbook of (central) auditory processing disorder. 1st ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing Inc; 2007. p. 349-67.
11. Friedman HL, Johnson RL. Compressed speech: correlates of listening ability. J Commun. 1968;18(3):207-18.
12. Wingfield A, Nolan KA. Spontaneous segmentation in normal and in time-compressed speech. Percept Psychophys. 1980;28(2):97-102.
13. Keith RW. Standardization of the time compressed sentence test. Journal of Educational Audiology. 2002;10:15-20.
14. Perrachione TK, Ghosh SS, Ostrovskaya I, Gabrieli JDE, Kovelman I. Phonological working memory for words and nonwords in cerebral cortex. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017;60(7):1959-79. doi: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-15-0446
15. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95(2):1085-99. doi: 10.1121/1.408469
16. Shahmir B, Hajiabolhassan F, Mohammadkhani G, Tahaei AA, Jalaie S. Development and evaluation of the reliability of Persian version of double dichotic digit test in girls aged 7 to 11 years. Aud Vestib Res. 2015;24(3):164-70.
17. Jafari Z, Jafarlou F, Omidvar S, Kamali M, Sabour M. [Time compressed speech perception in elderly people]. Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2012;6(4):58-64. Persian.
18. Crum RM, Anthony JC, Bassett SS, Folstein MF. Population-based norms for the mini-mental state examination by age and educational level. JAMA. 1993;269(18):2386-91.
19. Jafarlou F, Jafari Z, Kamali M, Jeddi Z. [The impact of compression rate and sex on the results of time compressed speech test]. Audiol. 2013;22(2):47-54. Persian.
20. Prabhu P, Seshadri D, Ganeshan A, Babu L. Test–retest reliability of Kannada time-compressed speech test and time-compressed monosyllables test. Hearing Balance Commun. 2016;14(3):111-6. doi; 10.1080/21695717.2016.1196981
Files
IssueVol 28 No 4 (2019) QRcode
SectionResearch Article(s)
DOI https://doi.org/10.18502/avr.v28i4.1461
Keywords
Central auditory nervous system; psychometric properties; central auditory perceptual disorder
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Alishahnejad M, Hajiabolhassan F, Jalaie S, Lucker J, Zamiri Abdollahi F, Rouhbakhsh N. Determination of appropriate compression rate for developing the Persian version of time compressed sentence test. Aud Vestib Res. 2019;28(4):249-255.