An Audio-Visual Test for Evaluating the Ability to Recognize Phonetic Errors An audio-visual test was developed for ascertaining ability inrecognizing misarticulations. Two films, each with a different set of 23 words representing 23 initial and 20 final sounds, were produced. Each test included 138 consonant sounds in phrases, 276 in isolated words, and 144 in trios of words. An empirical “correct” ... Research Article
Research Article  |   September 01, 1965
An Audio-Visual Test for Evaluating the Ability to Recognize Phonetic Errors
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ruth Beckey Irwin
    The Ohio State University
  • Ivan Paul Krafchick
    University of Florida
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   September 01, 1965
An Audio-Visual Test for Evaluating the Ability to Recognize Phonetic Errors
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, September 1965, Vol. 8, 281-290. doi:10.1044/jshr.0803.281
History: Received February 25, 1965
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, September 1965, Vol. 8, 281-290. doi:10.1044/jshr.0803.281
History: Received February 25, 1965

An audio-visual test was developed for ascertaining ability inrecognizing misarticulations. Two films, each with a different set of 23 words representing 23 initial and 20 final sounds, were produced. Each test included 138 consonant sounds in phrases, 276 in isolated words, and 144 in trios of words. An empirical “correct” answer sheet was prepared by two experienced clinicians after repeated viewings of the films. Six children with misarticulations presented stimuli in the films.

One-hundred-fifty subjects included speech clinicians with five or more years of experience, graduating senior majors in speech pathology, and experienced teachers. Each subject took three tests: Film A (audio-visual), Film B (audio-visual), and the sound-track of Film A presented without motion pictures (audio only). Correctly identified misarticulations, falsely identified misarticulations, and total correct responses were tabulated. Both forms of the audio-visual test were considered valid since the clinicians and students were significantly better than the teachers in identifying misarticulations. Satisfactory reliability was also established, since Films A and B were not significantly different in the accurate identification of sounds in words.

Performance was significantly better for audio-visual representation than for audio only; and identification of misarticulation was best with isolated words and worst with phrases. Experienced teachers did not identify 12 of the sounds as accurately as experienced clinicians.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access