The measurement of intelligibility in dysarthric individuals is a major concern in clinical assessment and management and in research on dysarthria. The measurement objective is complicated by the fact that intelligibility is not an absolute quantity but rather a relative quantity that depends on variables such as test material, personnel, training, test procedures, and state of the speaker. This paper reviews scaling procedures and item identification tests as they have been applied to dysarthric speech. Based in part on previous studies of speech of the hearing impaired, a profile has been designed to direct research on the acoustic or physiologic correlates of dysarthric intelligibility impairment. In addition, a word intelligibility test is proposed for use with dysarthric speakers. This test is designed to examine 19 acoustic-phonetic contrasts that are likely to (a) be sensitive to dysarthric impairment and (b) contribute significantly to speech intelligibility. Preliminary data from a sample of subjects with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis are presented to illustrate the use of this test in the phonetic interpretation of intelligibility impairment.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between scaled speech intelligibility and selected acoustic variables in persons with dysarthria. Control speakers and speakers with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and Parkinson’s disease (PD) produced sentences which were analyzed acoustically and perceptually. The acoustic variables included total utterance durations, segment durations, estimates of the acoustic vowel space, and slopes of formant transitions; the perceptual variables included scaled speech intelligibility and severity of speech involvement. Results indicated that the temporal variables typically differentiated the ALS group, but not the PD group, from the controls, and that vowel spaces were smaller for both neurogenic groups as compared to controls, but only significantly so for the ALS speakers. The relation of these acoustic measures to scaled speech intelligibility is shown to be complex, and the composite results are discussed in terms of sentence vs. single-word intelligibility estimates and their underlying acoustic bases.

The maximum performance tests of speech production are those tests that examine the upper limits of performance for selected speech tasks. Among the most commonly used maximum performance tests are the following: maximum duration of phonation, maximum fricative duration, maximum phonation volume, maximum expiratory pressure, fundamental frequency range, maximum sound pressure level, maximum occluding force of the articulators, and diadochokinetic (maximum repetition) rate. Many clinicians use at least some of these tasks as part of an assessment protocol. These tests are analogous to strength, range, or speed tests in clinical neurology. Given the widespread use of these tests and a rather scattered literature on normative values obtained for them, a survey of the data base seemed in order. This paper summarizes the published normative data, discusses the adequacy of these data for clinical application, and recommends interpretive guidelines to enhance the usefulness of maximum performance tests.

Although ataxic dysarthria has been studied with various methods in several languages, questions remain concerning which features of the disorder are most consistent, which speaking tasks are most sensitive to the disorder, and whether the different speech production subsystems are uniformly affected. Perceptual and acoustic data were obtained from 14 individuals (seven men, seven women) with ataxic dysarthria for several speaking tasks, including sustained vowel phonation, syllable repetition, sentence recitation, and conversation. Multidimensional acoustic analyses of sustained vowel phonation showed that the largest and most frequent abnormality for both men and women was a long-term variability of fundamental frequency. Other measures with a high frequency of abnormality were shimmer and peak amplitude variation (for both sexes) and jitter (for women). Syllable alternating motion rate (AMR) was typically slow and irregular in its temporal pattern. In addition, the energy maxima and minima often were highly variable across repeated syllables, and this variability is thought to reflect poorly coordinated respiratory function and inadequate articulatory/voicing control. Syllable rates tended to be slower for sentence recitation and conversation than for AMR, but the three rates were highly similar. Formant-frequency ranges during sentence production were essentially normal, showing that articulatory hypometria is not a pervasive problem. Conversational samples varied considerably across subjects in intelligibility and number of words/ morphemes in a breath group. Qualitative analyses of unintelligible episodes in conversation showed that these samples generally had a fairly well-defined syllable pattern but subjects differed in the degree to which the acoustic contrasts typical of consonant and vowel sequences were maintained. For some individuals, an intelligibility deficit occurred in the face of highly distinctive (and contrastive) acoustic patterns.

No abstract