2019
DOI: 10.1044/2019_jslhr-h-18-0317
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnostic Precision of Open-Set Versus Closed-Set Word Recognition Testing

Abstract: Purpose The aim of the study was to examine the precision of forced-choice (closed-set) and open-ended (open-set) word recognition (WR) tasks for identifying a change in hearing. Method WR performance for closed-set (4 and 6 choices) and open-set tasks was obtained from 70 listeners with normal hearing. Speech recognition was degraded by presenting monosyllabic words in noise (−8, −4, 0, and 4 signal-to-noise ratios) or processed by a sine wave vocoder … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Beyond the linguistic level, perception is affected by overarching task context. Variation in attentional demands (e.g., single task or dual task: Casini et al, 2009; Saltzman et al, 2021), stimulus presentation (e.g., interstimulus interval: Coady et al, 2005) and the variability of the stimulus set (e.g., open-set or closed-set: Clopper et al, 2006; Yu & Schlauch, 2019) and can all impact interpretation of ambiguous speech. Furthermore, interactive models such as TRACE (McClelland & Elman, 1986) provide a computational framework in which context constrains perceptual interpretation of ambiguous speech via bidirectional connections between different processing levels (see McClelland et al, 2006, for a review).…”
Section: Overview Of the Present Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beyond the linguistic level, perception is affected by overarching task context. Variation in attentional demands (e.g., single task or dual task: Casini et al, 2009; Saltzman et al, 2021), stimulus presentation (e.g., interstimulus interval: Coady et al, 2005) and the variability of the stimulus set (e.g., open-set or closed-set: Clopper et al, 2006; Yu & Schlauch, 2019) and can all impact interpretation of ambiguous speech. Furthermore, interactive models such as TRACE (McClelland & Elman, 1986) provide a computational framework in which context constrains perceptual interpretation of ambiguous speech via bidirectional connections between different processing levels (see McClelland et al, 2006, for a review).…”
Section: Overview Of the Present Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both phoneme and word scoring can be used with the COPT. Open-set phoneme scoring can be more effective in identifying changes in hearing than open-set word scoring or closed-set word scoring [ 33 ]. The COPT materials can be presented in background noise or in quiet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the context of open-set tests for spoken word recognition, it is essential to acknowledge the presence of lexical rivalry that occurs over the entirety of the mental lexicon [16]. At this point, it is crucial to acknowledge that closed-set WRS testing has distinct advantages for implementation compared to open-set WRS testing [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%