A Comparison of Single Words and Conversational Speech in Phonological Evaluation Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to compare conversational speech samples with single-word samples that were partially tailored to the participants' individual phonological profiles, using aspects of nonlinear phonological frameworks as a basis for evaluation. Method: There were 20 participants in the study, ranging in age from 3;0 ... Research Article
Research Article  |   August 01, 2005
A Comparison of Single Words and Conversational Speech in Phonological Evaluation
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Julie J. Masterson
    Missouri State University, Springfield
  • Barbara H. Bernhardt
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  • Monica K. Hofheinz
    National HealthCare, Murfreesboro, TN
  • Contact author: Julie J. Masterson, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Missouri State University, 901 South National Avenue, Springfield, MO 65897. E-mail: juliemasterson@missouristate.edu
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Normal Language Processing / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Research Articles
Research Article   |   August 01, 2005
A Comparison of Single Words and Conversational Speech in Phonological Evaluation
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, August 2005, Vol. 14, 229-241. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2005/023)
History: Received December 13, 2004 , Revised June 30, 2005 , Accepted July 22, 2005
 
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, August 2005, Vol. 14, 229-241. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2005/023)
History: Received December 13, 2004; Revised June 30, 2005; Accepted July 22, 2005
Web of Science® Times Cited: 8

Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to compare conversational speech samples with single-word samples that were partially tailored to the participants' individual phonological profiles, using aspects of nonlinear phonological frameworks as a basis for evaluation.

Method: There were 20 participants in the study, ranging in age from 3;0 to 10;5 (years;months). The Computerized Articulation and Phonology Evaluation System (J. J. Masterson & B. Bernhardt, 2001) was used to elicit single-word productions.

Results: Both group and individual comparisons indicated very few differences in accuracy or treatment ramifications. The time required to elicit and transcribe the conversational samples was typically 3 times greater than the time required for the single-word task. The single-word task elicited more of the English-language targets.

Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that a single-word task tailored to some extent to the client's phonological system gives sufficient and representative information for phonological evaluation. A brief conversational sample remains useful for examining prosody, intelligibility, and other aspects of language, and as a check on the representativeness of the single-word sample.

Acknowledgments
The use of CAPES in this study was made possible by a software grant from The Psychological Corporation. This article is based on a series of research projects conducted by graduate students in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Missouri State University. We appreciate the contributions of Ferenc Bunta, Brandy Bridges, Brittany Drury, Tricia George, Caleb Masterson, Melissa Wald, and Zelma Vance. We also thank the speech-language pathologists from Reeds Spring and Ozark School Districts and the Speech-Language-Hearing Clinic at Missouri State University for their participation, as well as speech-language pathologists Judi Israels and Karen Tsui at the Richmond Health Unit in Richmond, British Columbia. For comments throughout the analysis and writing process, we would like to thank Joseph P. Stemberger, linguist at the University of British Columbia. We especially thank the children and their families for their words.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access