Whitehill Tara L, Lee Alice S Y, Chun Joyce C
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Hong Kong, 34 Hospital Road (5/F), Hong Kong.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002 Feb;45(1):80-8. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2002/006).
Hypernasality is most commonly assessed using equal-appearing interval (EAI) scaling. Recently, the validity of EAI scaling for the evaluation of hypernasality has been questioned. The issue of validity rests on the psychophysical nature of the dimension to be rated. The purpose of this study was to compare EAI scaling with direct magnitude estimation (DME), in order to determine whether EAI scaling is a valid procedure for the evaluation of hypernasality. Connected speech samples from 20 individuals with repaired cleft palate and hypernasality were used. Twenty listeners undertook the listening tasks, which included EAI scaling, DME with modulus (DME-M), and DME without modulus (DME-WM). The results showed a curvilinear relationship between EAI and DME-M and between EAI and DME-WM, suggesting that EAI may not be a valid method for the evaluation of hypernasality; DME is recommended.
高鼻音最常使用等距量表(EAI)进行评估。最近,EAI量表在评估高鼻音方面的有效性受到了质疑。有效性问题取决于待评级维度的心理物理学性质。本研究的目的是将EAI量表与直接数量估计法(DME)进行比较,以确定EAI量表是否是评估高鼻音的有效方法。使用了20名腭裂修复且有高鼻音个体的连贯语音样本。20名听众承担了听力任务,包括EAI量表、带模数的直接数量估计法(DME-M)和不带模数的直接数量估计法(DME-WM)。结果显示EAI与DME-M以及EAI与DME-WM之间呈曲线关系,这表明EAI可能不是评估高鼻音的有效方法;建议使用DME。