Development, and validation of non-speech dichotic listening test

IF 1.4 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Hari Prakash Palaniswamy , Mayur Bhat , Rajashree Ganesh Bhat , Y. Krishna , B. Rajashekhar
{"title":"Development, and validation of non-speech dichotic listening test","authors":"Hari Prakash Palaniswamy ,&nbsp;Mayur Bhat ,&nbsp;Rajashree Ganesh Bhat ,&nbsp;Y. Krishna ,&nbsp;B. Rajashekhar","doi":"10.1016/j.joto.2022.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Classic dichotic listening tests using speech stimuli result in right ear advantage, due to the dominant crossed pathway for speech and language. It is presumed that similar crossed dominance could exist for non-speech stimuli too. Hence, this is an attempt to develop and validate the dichotic non-speech test using environmental stimuli and explore the effect of focused attention on this test.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and method</h3><p>Three lists of dichotic stimuli were created using these sounds with fifteen tokens in each list. Four professionals and non-professionals validated these materials. Normative estimation was obtained by administering the newly developed test on 70 adults and 70 children using a free-recall and forced-recall condition.</p></div><div><h3>Result</h3><p>The results showed a significant difference between the left ear and right scores where the left ear score was better than the right, depicting left ear advantage (LEA) for free recall condition in both groups. In the forced recall condition, LEA was not seen; rather the mean score was significantly higher in the attended ear, irrespective of the stimuli presented to the right or left ear. The test-retest reliability in free recall was good in both the ears and moderate for forced right ear conditions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The novel test consistently showed LEA with good reliability and can be used to assess the hemispheric asymmetry in normal subjects and also in test batteries for the clinical population.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37466,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Otology","volume":"18 1","pages":"Pages 63-69"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/53/31/main.PMC9937819.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672293022000733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Classic dichotic listening tests using speech stimuli result in right ear advantage, due to the dominant crossed pathway for speech and language. It is presumed that similar crossed dominance could exist for non-speech stimuli too. Hence, this is an attempt to develop and validate the dichotic non-speech test using environmental stimuli and explore the effect of focused attention on this test.

Materials and method

Three lists of dichotic stimuli were created using these sounds with fifteen tokens in each list. Four professionals and non-professionals validated these materials. Normative estimation was obtained by administering the newly developed test on 70 adults and 70 children using a free-recall and forced-recall condition.

Result

The results showed a significant difference between the left ear and right scores where the left ear score was better than the right, depicting left ear advantage (LEA) for free recall condition in both groups. In the forced recall condition, LEA was not seen; rather the mean score was significantly higher in the attended ear, irrespective of the stimuli presented to the right or left ear. The test-retest reliability in free recall was good in both the ears and moderate for forced right ear conditions.

Conclusion

The novel test consistently showed LEA with good reliability and can be used to assess the hemispheric asymmetry in normal subjects and also in test batteries for the clinical population.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

非言语分类听力测试的开发与验证
背景使用言语刺激的经典二分法听力测试会产生右耳优势,因为言语和语言的交叉通路占主导地位。据推测,非言语刺激也可能存在类似的交叉优势。因此,本文试图开发和验证使用环境刺激的二分法非言语测试,并探索集中注意力对该测试的影响。材料和方法使用这些声音创建三个二分刺激列表,每个列表中有15个标记。四名专业人员和非专业人员对这些材料进行了验证。通过使用自由回忆和强迫回忆条件对70名成年人和70名儿童进行新开发的测试,获得了规范性估计。结果左耳和右耳评分之间存在显著差异,其中左耳评分优于右耳评分,说明了两组在自由回忆条件下的左耳优势(LEA)。在强制召回的情况下,没有发现LEA;相反,无论右耳或左耳受到何种刺激,被护理耳朵的平均得分都明显更高。自由回忆的测试-再测试可靠性在双耳都很好,在强迫右耳条件下中等。结论该新测试一致显示LEA具有良好的可靠性,可用于评估正常受试者的半球不对称性,也可用于临床人群的测试电池。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Otology
Journal of Otology Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
461
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Otology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that publishes research findings from disciplines related to both clinical and basic science aspects of auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear. This journal welcomes submissions describing original experimental research that may improve our understanding of the mechanisms underlying problems of basic or clinical significance and treatment of patients with disorders of the auditory and vestibular systems. In addition to original papers the journal also offers invited review articles on current topics written by leading experts in the field. The journal is of primary importance for all scientists and practitioners interested in audiology, otology and neurotology, auditory neurosciences and related disciplines. Journal of Otology welcomes contributions from scholars in all countries and regions across the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信