Articulation testing versus conversational speech sampling.
Articulation testing versus conversational speech sampling.
复制标题
清晰度测试与会话语音采样。
DOI：
10.1044/jshr.3502.259
复制
发表时间：
1992
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Shriberg,LD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Morrison,JA;Shriberg,LD
详细的语音分析数据进行了评估，从61个语言迟缓儿童的标准清晰度测试和会话语音样本。从两种抽样模式获得的发音准确性配置文件之间的统计显着差异进行了观察，在所有的语言水平检查，包括整体准确性，语音过程，个别音素，方式功能，错误类型，单词的位置，和音位变体。建立的声音往往产生更准确地在会话讲话，而新兴的声音往往产生更准确地响应清晰度测试刺激。错误模式涉及字到字的过渡，只有在连续讲话的情况下。通过失败分析表明，平均受试者将收到类似的临床决策，从清晰度测试和会话语音采样平均71%的辅音声音。人口统计学，语言和语音变量的分析没有产生任何主题的特点，显着相关的一致率在两种采样模式。讨论认为采样模式之间的差异，包括与扬声器和转录器相关的过程的方差来源。在比较的有效性的会话语音样本的综合语音，语言和韵律分析，清晰度测试似乎既不产生典型的，也不是最佳的措施，语音性能。
Detailed speech analyses were performed on data from 61 speech-delayed children assessed by both a standard articulation test and a conversational speech sample. Statistically significant differences between the articulation accuracy profiles obtained from the two sampling modes were observed at all linguistic levels examined, including overall accuracy, phonological processes, individual phonemes, manner features, error-type, word position, and allophones. Established sounds were often produced more accurately in conversational speech, whereas emerging sounds were often produced more accurately in response to articulation test stimuli. Error patterns involving word-to-word transitions were available only in the context of continuous speech. A pass-fail analysis indicated that the average subject would receive similar clinical decisions from articulation testing and conversational speech sampling on an average of 71% of consonant sounds. Analyses of demographic, language, and speech variables did not yield any subject characteristics that were significantly associated with concordance rates in the two sampling modes. Discussion considers sources of variance for differences between sampling modes, including processes associated with both the speaker and the transcriber. In comparison to the validity of conversational speech samples for integrated speech, language, and prosodic analyses, articulation tests appear to yield neither typical nor optimal measures of speech performance.