Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11(01): 52-55
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748008
Original Article

Anticipatory Strategy Training: Implications for the Postlingually Hearing-Impaired Adult

Adrienne Rubinstein
Department of Speech Communication Arts and Sciences, Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, New York
,
Rochelle Cherry
Department of Speech Communication Arts and Sciences, Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, New York
,
Perri Hecht
Department of Speech Communication Arts and Sciences, Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, New York
,
Carrie Idler
Department of Speech Communication Arts and Sciences, Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, New York
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The present study was designed to determine if speech recognition performance will improve after subjects prepare for an unfamiliar communication situation as opposed to a familiar one. Forty-five normal-hearing subjects were divided into three groups: one trained using a well-known fairytale, one trained using an obscure fable, and one without training. Post-training, all groups performed similarly when tested on the familiar tale. When test material involved the unfamiliar fable, only the group trained on that material obtained significantly better scores than the other groups. Results support teaching clients that increasing their knowledge of upcoming unfamiliar events can improve subsequent speech recognition.

Abbreviations: ANOVA = analysis of variance

Key Words

Aural rehabilitation - speech recognition - strategies


Publication History

Article published online:
05 April 2022

© 2000. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • Bilger R, Nuetzel J, Rabinowitz W, Rzeczkowski C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. J Speech Hear Disord 27:32–48.
  • Boothroyd A, Hnath-Chisolm T, Hanin L. (1985). A Test of Speech Perception: Reliability, Set Equivalence, and Short-term Learning. Unpublished report No. RC1 10, New York: City University of New York.
  • Carroll J, Davies P, Richman B. (1971). Word Frequency Book. New York: American Heritage.
  • Cherry R. (1997). An integrated approach to aural rehabilitation. Semin Hear 18:162–184.
  • Cherry R, Rubinstein A. (1988). Speechreading instruction for adults: issues and approaches. Volta Rev 90: 289–306.
  • Erber N. (1992). Effects of a question-answer format on visual perception of sentences. J Acad Rehab Audiol 25: 113–122.
  • Garstecki D, O'Neill J. (1980). Situational cue and strategy influence on speechreading. Scand Audiol 9:147–151.
  • Kaplan H. (1997). Speechreading. Semin Hear 18: 129–140.
  • Kaplan H, Balley S, Garretson C. (1985). Speechreading: A Way to Improve Understanding. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
  • Miller G, Heise G, Lichten W. (1951). The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. J Acoust Soc Am 69:1791–1798.
  • Rubinstein A, Boothroyd A. (1987). Effect of two approaches to auditory training on speech recognition by hearing-impaired adults. J Speech Hear Res 30:153–160.
  • Tye-Murray N. (1994). Communication strategies training. Acad Rehabil Audiol 27:193–208.
  • Tye-Murray N. (1992). Preparing for communication interactions: the value of anticipatory strategies for adults with hearing impairment. J Speech Hear Res 35:430–435.
  • Van Tasell D, Hawkins D. (1981). Effects of guessing strategy on speechreading test scores. Am Ann Deaf 126: 840–844.