Uncategorized

WIPI 2nd Ed. Low Pass Filter at 750 Hz©

~ auditecinfo ~ Leave a comment

The WIPI 2nd Ed. Low Pass Filter at 750 Hz© is a challenging auditory processing disorder test for children. It is considered a monaural low-redundancy speech test (monaural separation closure-MSC) sensitive to brainstem and cortical lesions.

The WIPI 2nd Ed. Low Pass Filter at 750 Hz© includes a) audio recording, and b) word list. This product does not include instructions or normative data. It is assumed that purchasers of Auditec’s auditory tests are well trained in the use, purpose, and interpretation of audiological tests. The WIPI 2nd Ed. Picture Book is not included with this product but can be purchased separately.

©COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Auditec’s recordings are protected by copyright. Each product represents one license for up to two audiometers at one location. Sharing, uploading to servers, publishing to the internet, and all other forms of distribution are prohibited. Email questions regarding copyright to auditecinfo@auditec.com.

Available from Auditec,Inc. Use the “Buy Now” button below to order. Free shipping to the contiguous US. INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMERS: Importers are responsible for duties and taxes. Auditec advises your organization to contact your government to estimate tax prior to ordering.

WIPI 2nd Ed. Low Pass Filter at 750 Hz© (CD Format); Item 171-7R; Price $65.00 USD + S&H
Buy Now Button

WIPI 2nd Ed. Low Pass Filter at 1000 Hz© (USB Format); Item USB171-7R; Price $71.00 USD + S&H
Buy Now Button

CONTINUE SHOPPING

ASHA Spondees; Child Spondees©

~ auditecinfo ~ Leave a comment

This product consists of a recording of ASHA Spondees with a recording of Child Spondees.

ASHA Spondees© is a speech threshold (speech reception threshold-SRT) recording. It is two sets of 18 spondaic words formulated by an American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) committee of audiologists. The two lists are considered to be of equivalent difficulty. The SRT is 20 dB SPL. This list is considered an adult word list. The administration time for the ASHA Spondees seven minutes.

Child Spondees is considered a speech threshold (or speech reception threshold-SRT) test. It is a list of spondaic words that was selected to be familiar to children. Auditec recorded 51 words in one randomization. The medium SRT is 20 dB SPL. The administration time for Child Spondees is five minutes.

The ASHA Spondees; Child Spondees© includes a) audio recording and b) printed word lists. This product does not include instructions or normative data. It is assumed that purchasers of Auditec’s auditory tests are well trained in the use, purpose, and interpretation of basic tests.

©COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Auditec’s recordings are protected by copyright. Each product represents one license for up to two audiometers at one location. Sharing, uploading to servers, publishing to the internet, and all other forms of distribution are prohibited. Email questions regarding copyright to auditecinfo@auditec.com.

Use the “Buy Now” button below to order. FREE shipping to contiguous US locations. INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMERS: Importers are responsible for duties and taxes. Auditec advises your organization to contact your government to estimate tax prior to ordering.

ASHA Spondees, Child Spondees© (CD Format); Item 102A; Price $59.50+S&H
Buy Now Button

ASHA Spondees, Child Spondees© (USB Format); Item USB102A; Price $65.50+S&H
Buy Now Button

CONTINUE SHOPPING

Spanish Pediatric Picture Identification Test© (SPPIT) FEMALE TALKER

~ auditecinfo ~ Leave a comment

The Spanish Pediatric Picture Identification Test© (SPPIT) FEMALE TALKER is a closed-set picture-pointing word recognition test appropriate for children four and up. The SPPIT picture book consists of 25 color plates with four pictures per page. Its pages can be easily wiped to prevent the spread of germs. The recording is comprised of three 25-word lists spoken by a female talker from Mexico. It is presented in two ways: a) Spanish words on the left channel with the English translation on the right channel, and b) Spanish words on both channels. Administration time is approximately 5-10 minutes. The SPPIT developers in the Speech Perception Assessment Laboratory at the University of Memphis strongly recommend purchasing its companion test: Spanish Pediatric Speech Recognition Threshold Test (SPSRT) FEMALE TALKER.

The Spanish Pediatric Picture Identification© (SPPIT) FEMALE TALKER includes: a) audio recording, b) picture book, c) instructions, d) summary, e) picture book key, and score forms as printable pdf files.

©COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Auditec’s recordings are protected by copyright. Each product represents one license for up to two audiometers at one location. Sharing, uploading to servers, publishing to the internet, and all other forms of distribution are prohibited. Email questions regarding copyright to auditecinfo@auditec.com.

Available from Auditec, Inc. Use the “Buy Now” button below to order. Free shipping within the contiguous US. Importers are responsible for duties and taxes. Auditec advises your organization to contact your government to estimate tax prior to ordering.

Spanish Pediatric Picture Identification Test© – Female (CD Format); Item CD174-9; Price $180.00 + S&H Buy Now Button

Spanish Pediatric Picture Identification Test© – Female (USB Format); Item USB174-9; Price $186.00 + S&H Buy Now Button

https://youtu.be/cP16KEHrAEQ&rel=0

CONTINUE SHOPPING

THE USE OF HALF-LIST WORD RECOGNITION TESTS

~ auditecinfo ~ 1 Comment

Written by William F. Carver, Ph.D., FAAA, FASHA, CCC(A)ret.

The problem of the amount of time required to thoroughly assess a client’s hearing capabilities is one which has plagued audiologists for many, many years. In an attempt to shorten the duration of a testing session, many audiologists utilize so-called “half lists.” This has been accomplished by either simply stopping the test after 25 words (from a 50 word list) or employing half lists that have been published.

As the reader may well know, both the W-22 and NU-6 have half list versions. Some of these lists have been ordered by difficulty, such that one can reduce the number of words to 10 in certain cases. While many deplore the use of half lists, their use has been ubiquitous. There are those who argue that 50 words are necessary to obtain reliable and valid results. That decision is up to the reader, but I recommend the Hurley version (see below).

Campbell’s half lists employ words from the W-22 lists. There are eight lists labeled M thru T. They are NOT ordered by difficulty. Beyond the initial research which produced these lists, I have not seen any further research on the lists. Consequently, I have no idea of their reliability or validity.

Auditec has two versions of NU-6 half lists, both of which purport to be ordered by difficulty. The first one, by Rose, is not recommended. (It was developed using Tillman’s NU-6 recording.) We have a more modern version by Hurley which has been rigorously researched using Auditec’s recording.* Both NU-6 versions use an interesting method for cutting test time significantly for patients with excellent word recognition ability.  That is; the first 10 words in each list are the MOST difficult words in the list, so, if a patient misses any of these most difficult words, then the next 15 (total 25) words are presented. The Rose version stops there, while the recommendation for the Hurley version is that if more than three words are missed out of the 25, that the entire 50 word list be given. The Rose version will not allow that, since there are only 25 words in each of his (7) lists.

In addition, the Hurley version is available with a short interstimulus interval, which significantly reduces test time. (See our previous blog Short Interstimulus Interval.)

It must be obvious why we recommend the Hurley version for all word recognition testing. However, if one does not feel comfortable using half lists, then the entire 50 word list is there. On the other hand, if one is pressed for time, it is believed that the Hurley approach will produce reliable and valid information about a patient’s word recognition ability.

I should mention another test, the California Consonant Test (CCT). (It is not phonetically balanced, it employs 100 words per list (of two) which are heavily loaded with high pitched words.) It is a closed set test. The developers, Owens & Schubert, found that list 1 could be given as a half list. That is, they found that scores on each half were highly correlated and their results were reliable. This is not the case with list 2, however.

Hurley, R.M. & Sells, J.P. “An Abbreviated Word Recognition Protocol Based on Item Difficulty” Ear & Hearing, 24, 2003 (111-118)

Click here to go to Auditec’s website homepage.

Use of “Laud” in the NU-6 List

~ auditecinfo ~ Leave a comment

Written by William F. Carver, Ph.D., FAAA, FASHA, CCC(A)ret.

You may have read about one of the words employed in the Northwestern University Auditory Test Number 6 (NU-6): laud. This word, found in list 1, is routinely missed by clients. (In our experience, one of two responses are obtained: lord or log.) Some individuals have suggested substituting another word for laud, but agreement on a good substitute has not been forthcoming.

The final suggestion is that, until an adequate substitute be found, the list be considered a 49 word test and the scoring be changed: N x 2.041 = % correct. (Number correctly repeated times 2.041. We suggest rounding to the nearest whole number.). Auditec, Inc. is not prepared to eliminate laud from its recordings. We will leave it up to the audiologist to either ignore the subject’s response or include it in their scoring. A 2% difference in a word recognition test is certainly not significant.

Click here to visit Auditec’s website homepage.

Short Interval Recordings

~ auditecinfo ~ 1 Comment

Written by William F. Carver, Ph.D., FAAA, FASHA, CCC(A)ret.

A little more about live voice vs. recorded testing. One of the major reasons that I hear from those who defend the practice of using live voice is that recorded tests take too long.  Typically, we use four seconds as the interstimulus interval.  This period of silence between stimuli appears to be sufficient for most people to hear the word, decide what it is and repeat it.  I have and I’m sure that most audiologists have, experienced extremely slow responders where even four seconds is inadequate. On the other hand, we experience the quick responders for whom a couple of seconds is sufficient.  Auditec has, therefore, produced recordings with shortened interstimulus intervals of 2.5 seconds.  I know of many audiologists who have taken advantage of these recordings quite successfully.  (For the occasional slow responder, one can employ the pause button on their playback device.)

Short interval recordings are available from Auditec, Inc.  See a sample comparison in the video below. The most popular version is the NU-6 Ordered by Difficulty Version II.

https://youtu.be/RVWr75BNraI&rel=0

WORD RECOGNITION TESTING, LIVE VOICE VS. RECORDED

~ auditecinfo ~ 1 Comment

Written by William F. Carver, Ph.D., FAAA, FASHA, CCC(A)ret.

You receive a referral from an audiologist.  An audiogram which includes a word recognition score is sent with the patient.  What can you tell from the word recognition score?  Nothing!   What list was used; W-22, NU-6, or PBK lists?  Did the audiologist use live voice, or was it from a recording?  Was it from a commercially available recording?  What is the articulation function (performance/intensity function) of the recording or of the audiologist’s voice? These variables can have a profound effect on  a word recognition score.

Presentations of cases (Grand Rounds) at conventions and meetings usually include an audiogram, SRT and word recognition scores…again what can you tell from the word recognition score?  If the presentation does not include information relative to how it was obtained with what materials, you have no real idea of the patient’s ability to discriminate speech.

To convey the crucial information about a person’s ability to communicate verbally, one must specify, not only the word recognition score, but must list: the list (i.e. W-22 or NU-6), the sensation level at which the test was administered, whether live voice or recorded.  If live voice, what is “normal?”  If from a recording, who’s recording (i.e. Auditec, dubbed from Technisonics, LAFO, QMass, etc.) ?

What variables control a word recognition score?  1.  The talker (the primary source of variation), 2. The presentation level, and 3. The list employed.

Word recognition (nee speech discrimination) is a slippery aspect of auditory tests.  Attempts have been made to standardize word recognition testing, but results have been disappointing.  Ideally, recorded tests that have been used throughout the area should be used.  And, ideally, one should not rely on a single score.  It has been shown that some sensory-neural patients will exhibit an articulation function that rises slowly and then curls over at higher levels.  Thus if one measures word recognition at a comparatively low level, it may be missed that a patient’s word recognition gets worse at higher levels.  A significant finding.

The point is, one should take the time to used recorded materials when testing for word recognition and ideally, especially in sensori-neural cases, obtain at least two measures at medium and high levels.

Adult word recognition lists like the NU-6 and W-22 and child word recognition lists like the PBK are available from Auditec, Inc.