The CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R as Predictors of (C)AP Skills and (C)APD PurposeIn this study, the authors investigated the relationships between 3 tests used to screen for (central) auditory processing disorder ([C]APD)—the Children’s Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS; W. J. Smoski, M. A. Brunt, & J. C. Tannahill, 1998), the Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (SIFTER; K. Anderson, 1989), and the Test ... Article
Article  |   February 01, 2011
The CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R as Predictors of (C)AP Skills and (C)APD
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Wayne J. Wilson
    The University of Queensland, Australia, and The University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
  • Alison Jackson
    The University of Queensland
  • Alice Pender
    The University of Queensland
  • Carla Rose
    La Trobe University, Australia
  • Jacqueline Wilson
    The University of Queensland
  • Chyrisse Heine
    La Trobe University, Australia
  • Asad Khan
    The University of Queensland
  • Contact author: Wayne J. Wilson, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland 4072, Australia. E-mail: w.wilson@uq.edu.au.
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Hearing & Speech Perception / Acoustics / Hearing Disorders / Research Issues, Methods & Evidence-Based Practice / Professional Issues & Training / ASHA News & Member Stories / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Hearing
Article   |   February 01, 2011
The CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R as Predictors of (C)AP Skills and (C)APD
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 2011, Vol. 54, 278-291. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0273)
History: Received December 10, 2009 , Revised June 7, 2010 , Accepted June 28, 2010
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 2011, Vol. 54, 278-291. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0273)
History: Received December 10, 2009; Revised June 7, 2010; Accepted June 28, 2010
Web of Science® Times Cited: 14

PurposeIn this study, the authors investigated the relationships between 3 tests used to screen for (central) auditory processing disorder ([C]APD)—the Children’s Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS; W. J. Smoski, M. A. Brunt, & J. C. Tannahill, 1998), the Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (SIFTER; K. Anderson, 1989), and the Test of Auditory Perceptual Skills—Revised (TAPS–R; M. Y. Gardner, 1997)—and 4 tests used to diagnostically assess for (C)APD: Low-Pass Filtered Speech (LPFS), Competing Sentences (CS), Two-Pair Dichotic Digits (DD), and Frequency Patterns With Linguistic Report (FP).

MethodThe screening and diagnostic (C)APD tests results of 104 children (71 boys, 33 girls) aged 6.9–14.3 years were reviewed following their attendance at a university clinic in Brisbane, Australia.

ResultsPearson’s product–moment correlation coefficient analysis showed weak (r = .22, p < .05) to moderate (r = .47, p < .01) correlations predominantly between the short-term and working memory test results of the TAPS–R and the DD and FP test results of the (C)AP test battery. Linear and binary logistic regression analyses showed a poor ability of the CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R test results to predict the individual LPFS, CS, DD, or FP test results or the overall risk for (C)APD.

ConclusionThe CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R should be used to highlight concerns about a child but not to determine whether a diagnostic (C)AP assessment is particularly warranted.

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