The Speech Intelligibility Index and the Pure-Tone Average as Predictors of Lexical Ability in Children Fit With Hearing Aids PurposeTo determine whether a clinically obtainable measure of audibility, the aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII; American National Standards Institute, 2007), is more sensitive than the pure-tone average (PTA) at predicting the lexical abilities of children who wear hearing aids (CHA).MethodSchool-age CHA and age-matched children with normal hearing (CNH) repeated words ... Article
Article  |   June 01, 2012
The Speech Intelligibility Index and the Pure-Tone Average as Predictors of Lexical Ability in Children Fit With Hearing Aids
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Derek J. Stiles
    University of Iowa, Iowa City
  • Ruth A. Bentler
    University of Iowa, Iowa City
  • Karla K. McGregor
    University of Iowa, Iowa City
  • Correspondence to Derek J. Stiles, who is now at Rush University: derek_stiles@rush.edu
  • Editor: Sid Bacon
    Editor: Sid Bacon×
  • Associate Editor: Pamela Souza
    Associate Editor: Pamela Souza×
Article Information
Hearing
Article   |   June 01, 2012
The Speech Intelligibility Index and the Pure-Tone Average as Predictors of Lexical Ability in Children Fit With Hearing Aids
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 2012, Vol. 55, 764-778. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0264)
History: Received September 23, 2010 , Revised May 17, 2011 , Accepted September 6, 2011
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 2012, Vol. 55, 764-778. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0264)
History: Received September 23, 2010; Revised May 17, 2011; Accepted September 6, 2011
Web of Science® Times Cited: 12

PurposeTo determine whether a clinically obtainable measure of audibility, the aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII; American National Standards Institute, 2007), is more sensitive than the pure-tone average (PTA) at predicting the lexical abilities of children who wear hearing aids (CHA).

MethodSchool-age CHA and age-matched children with normal hearing (CNH) repeated words and nonwords, learned novel words, and completed a standardized receptive vocabulary test. Analyses of covariance allowed comparison of the 2 groups. For CHA, regression analyses determined whether SII held predictive value over and beyond PTA.

ResultsCHA demonstrated poorer performance than CNH on tests of word and nonword repetition and receptive vocabulary. Groups did not differ on word learning. Aided SII was a stronger predictor of word and nonword repetition and receptive vocabulary than PTA. After accounting for PTA, aided SII remained a significant predictor of nonword repetition and receptive vocabulary.

ConclusionsDespite wearing hearing aids, CHA performed more poorly on 3 of 4 lexical measures. Individual differences among CHA were predicted by aided SII. Unlike PTA, aided SII incorporates hearing aid amplification characteristics and speech-frequency weightings and may provide a more valid estimate of the child's access to and ability to learn from auditory input in real-world environments.

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