The Filtered Words Test and the Influence of Lexicality Purpose In the present study, the authors aimed to investigate the language confounds of filtered words tests by examining the repetition of real words versus nonsense words as a function of level of filtering. Method Fifty-five young, native-English-speaking women with normal hearing were required to repeat 80 real-word and ... Research Article
Research Article  |   October 01, 2014
The Filtered Words Test and the Influence of Lexicality
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Wendy Arnott
    University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Tara Goli
    University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Andrew Bradley
    University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Andrew Smith
    University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Wayne Wilson
    University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.×
  • Correspondence to Wendy Arnott: w.arnott@uq.edu.au
  • Editor: Rhea Paul
    Editor: Rhea Paul×
  • Associate Editor: Jessica Richardson
    Associate Editor: Jessica Richardson×
Article Information
Hearing & Speech Perception / Normal Language Processing / Language Disorders / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Language / Research Articles
Research Article   |   October 01, 2014
The Filtered Words Test and the Influence of Lexicality
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, October 2014, Vol. 57, 1722-1730. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-L-13-0210
History: Received August 5, 2013 , Revised November 19, 2013 , Accepted March 3, 2014
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, October 2014, Vol. 57, 1722-1730. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-L-13-0210
History: Received August 5, 2013; Revised November 19, 2013; Accepted March 3, 2014
Web of Science® Times Cited: 1

Purpose In the present study, the authors aimed to investigate the language confounds of filtered words tests by examining the repetition of real words versus nonsense words as a function of level of filtering.

Method Fifty-five young, native-English-speaking women with normal hearing were required to repeat 80 real-word and 80 nonsense-word monosyllables that were matched for phonemic content and low-pass filtered. Thirty participants were tested using a harsher filter range of 2000 to 500 Hz, and 25 participants were tested using a milder filter range of 3000 to 1500 Hz.

Results Paired-sample t tests compared accuracy (percentage of phonemes correct) for word and nonsense-word stimuli at each filter level. At filter levels between 3000 and 1750 Hz, performance for word stimuli was significantly better than for nonsense-word stimuli. Conversely, at filter levels between 500 and 1250 Hz, performance was significantly better for nonsense words.

Conclusions The linguistic content of real-word stimuli benefits performance on low-pass filtered speech tests at filter levels above 1500 Hz. Caution must be taken when using real-word stimuli in low-pass filtered speech tests as part of an auditory processing diagnostic test battery, because language ability will impact on performance.

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