Comparison of listeners' judgments of simulated and authentic stuttering using magnitude estimation scaling.
Summary.-The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether normal listeners can differentiate authentic and simulated stuttering. The subjects were 40 graduate and undergraduate students in hearing and speech sciences who were asked to listen to segments of authentic and simulated stuttered speech at varying severities. Using magnitude estimation scahg, each subject was asked to judge the samples of stuttered speech by providing a numerical response that matched the severity of the segment listened to. Analysis showed that the subiects discriminated benveen different severities of both the authentic and stuttered speech. They did not differentiate between authentic segments of stuttered speech and simulated ones.
Development of validated and reliable outcome measures for spasticity rehabilitation has been hampered by the difficulty of quantifying functionally important parameters such as pain, ease of care, and mobility. Nonetheless, a combination of measures designed to assess technical and functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and the cost effectiveness of treatment can be used together to evaluate status and track change in spasticity management, including treatment programs involving botulinum toxin. While double-blind, placebo-controlled studies remain the gold standard for clinical testing, the single-subject design is a useful alternative in many treatment protocols. Because no single tool can measure the many types of changes possible with treatment, the choice of assessment tools must be based on the functional changes expected from the treatment. A wide range of assessment tools are critically reviewed for their sensitivity, reliability, validity, and ease of administration.