Measuring intelligibility in spontaneous speech using syllables perceived as understood

Listening like a speech-training app: Expert and non-expert listeners' goodness ratings of children's speech

Speech training apps are being developed that provide automatic feedback concerning children's production of known target words, as a score on a 1-5 scale. However, this 'goodness' scale is still poorly understood. We investigated listeners' ratings of 'how many stars the app should provide as feedback' on children's utterances, and whether listener agreement is affected by clinical experience and/or access to anchor stimuli. In addition, we explored the association between goodness ratings and clinical measures of speech accuracy; the Percentage of Consonants Correct (PCC) and the Percentage of Phonemes Correct (PPC). Twenty speech-language pathologists and 20 non-expert listeners participated; half of the listeners in each group had access to anchor stimuli. The listeners rated 120 words, collected from children with and without speech sound disorder. Concerning reliability, intra-rater agreement was generally high, whereas inter-rater agreement was moderate. Access to anchor stimuli was associated with higher agreement, but only for non-expert listeners. Concerning the association between goodness ratings and the PCC/PPC, correlations were moderate for both listener groups, under both conditions. The results indicate that the task of rating goodness is difficult, regardless of clinical experience, and that access to anchor stimuli is insufficient for achieving reliable ratings. This raises concerns regarding the 1-5 rating scale as the means of feedback in speech training apps. More specific listener instructions, particularly regarding the intended context for the app, are suggested in collection of human ratings underlying the development of speech training apps. Until then, alternative means of feedback should be preferred.

Peer attitudes towards adolescents with speech disorders due to cleft lip and palate

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Individuals with speech disorders are often judged more negatively than peers without speech disorders. A limited number of studies examined the attitudes of adolescents toward peers with speech disorders due to a cleft lip with or without a cleft of the palate (CL ± P). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the attitudes of peers toward the speech of adolescents with CL ± P.

METHOD

Seventy-eight typically developing adolescents (15-18 years, 26 boys, 52 girls) judged audio and audiovisual samples of two adolescents with CL ± P based on three attitude components, i.e., cognitive, affective, and behavioral. The degree of speech intelligibility was also scored by their peers. The study investigated whether the three attitudes were determined by speech intelligibility or appearance of an individual with CL ± P. Furthermore, the influence of knowing someone with a cleft, the age, and gender of the listeners on their attitudes were explored.

RESULTS

A significantly positive correlation was found between the speech intelligibility percentage and the three different attitude components: more positive attitudes were observed when the speech intelligibility of the speaker was higher. A different appearance due to a cleft lip does not lead to more negative attitudes. Furthermore, boys seem to have more negative attitudes toward individuals with CL ± P compared to girls.

CONCLUSION

This study provided additional evidence that peers show more negative attitudes toward adolescents with less intelligible speech due to CL ± P. Intervention should focus on changing the cognitive, affective, and behavioral attitudes of peers in a more positive direction and remove the stigma of patients with a cleft. Further research is needed to verify these results.