Time-Interval Analysis of Interjudge and Intrajudge Agreement for Stuttering Event Judgments In response to the recognized need for a valid and reliable way to measure stuttering, this study investigates a measurement methodology based on time-interval analyses of stuttering event judgments. Three groups of judges, differing in stuttering judgment experience, identified stuttering events in 12 repeated presentations of five 1-min speech samples. ... Research Article
Research Article  |   June 01, 1992
Time-Interval Analysis of Interjudge and Intrajudge Agreement for Stuttering Event Judgments
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Anne K. Cordes
    University of California, Santa Barbara
  • Roger J. Ingham
    University of California, Santa Barbara
  • Peter Frank
    University of California, Santa Barbara
  • Janis Costello Ingham
    University of California, Santa Barbara
Article Information
Speech / Research Articles
Research Article   |   June 01, 1992
Time-Interval Analysis of Interjudge and Intrajudge Agreement for Stuttering Event Judgments
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 1992, Vol. 35, 483-494. doi:10.1044/jshr.3503.483
History: Received April 24, 1991 , Accepted September 17, 1991
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 1992, Vol. 35, 483-494. doi:10.1044/jshr.3503.483
History: Received April 24, 1991; Accepted September 17, 1991

In response to the recognized need for a valid and reliable way to measure stuttering, this study investigates a measurement methodology based on time-interval analyses of stuttering event judgments. Three groups of judges, differing in stuttering judgment experience, identified stuttering events in 12 repeated presentations of five 1-min speech samples. Fixed time intervals ranging from 0.2 sec to 7.0 sec were then superimposed on the event judgments by a data analysis program. Inter- and intrajudge interval-by-interval agreement, and agreement for total numbers of intervals containing stuttering event judgments, were calculated for each judge group. Results showed that agreement was superior among more experienced judges and in longer interval lengths. Agreement varied across speech samples but not across the repeated judgment opportunities. Agreement was maximized at greater than chance levels for an interval of approximately 3.0 sec, but even this best agreement did not exceed a mean of approximately 60% for experienced judges.

Acknowledgments
The authors express their appreciation to the students and faculty members who served as judges for this study; to Richard Moglia, who provided valuable technical support; and to Dr. Jeanna Riley, who carefully reviewed an earlier version of this manuscript. Portions of this article are based on a master’s thesis completed by Anne Cordes under the direction of Roger Ingham and Janis Costello Ingham; authorship is considered equal between the first two authors. Preliminary results were presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November, 1990. Portions of the research reported in this article were supported by grant #DC00060-01 A1 awarded to R. J. Ingham by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access