The appropriateness of direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling procedures for assessing the speech intelligibility of hearing-impaired adults was investigated by determining whether the continuum of the talkers' intelligibility was prothetic or metathetic. The intelligibility of 20 hearing-impaired talkers was scaled by 20 listeners using direct magnitude estimation and by 20 listeners using interval scaling. The two sets of scaling data were related in the curvilinear fashion that is typical of prothetic continua, indicating better construct validity for direct magnitude estimation than for interval scaling of speech intelligibility.

Previous research has indicated that hearing-impaired speakers' intelligibility scores are better when sentences are used than when word lists are used as speech material in word identification tests. The speech intelligibility of 20 hearing-impaired speakers was measured with word identification tests using isolated words (W-22 monosyllables) and words in sentences context (CID sentences). Analysis of individual speaker' intelligibility data revealed that sentence intelligibility scores were higher than word intelligibility scores only for the better speakers and that no differences were apparent between sentence and single-word intelligibility for the poorer speakers. These findings agree with the results of research with normal speeds degraged in intelligibility by noise or filtering and indicate that an interaction may exist between context and overall intelligibility in which only speech that has a certain degree of overall intelligibility may show further intelligibility improvement with increased contextual clues.

Regression and principal components analyses were employed to study the relationship between 28 segmental and suprasegmental acoustic parameters of speech production and measures of speech intelligibility for 40 severely to profoundly hearing-impaired persons in an effort to extend the findings of Metz, Samar, Schiavetti, Sitler, and Whitehead (1985). The principal components analysis derived six factors that accounted for 59% of the variance in the original 28 parameters. Consistent with the findings of Metz et al., a subsequent regression analysis using these six factors as predictor variables revealed two factors with strong predictive relationships to speech intelligibility. One factor primarily reflected segmental production processes related to the temporal and spatial differentiation of phonemes, whereas the other primarily reflected suprasegmental production processes associated with contrastive stress. However, the predictive capability of the present factor structure was somewhat reduced relative to the findings of Metz et al. (1985). Data presented indicate that the populations sampled in the two studies may have differed on one or more dimensions of subject characteristics. Considered collectively, the present findings and the findings of Metz et al. support the tractability of employing selected acoustic variables for the estimation of speech intelligibility.

The audibility curve of the chinchilla was measured on 76 animals using the auditory evoked response (AER). The standard behavioral measures of sensitivity and the AER measures are shown to agree within an average of 5 dB through the 0.25 to 8 kHz range. Furthermore, the AER is shown to reflect temporary and permanent partial losses of hearing due to noise exposure. It is concluded that the AER is a useful index of auditory sensitivity for the brief tones of the order of 20-msec duration.

The appropriateness of direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling for assessing stuttering severity was investigated by determining whether the continuum of the stutterers' judged severity was prothetic or metathetic. As operationally defined by Stevens, prothetic continua show a curvilinear relation between magnitude estimates and interval scale values of the same set of stimuli, whereas metathetic continua show a linear relation between these scale values. The stuttering severity of 20 stutterers was scaled by three groups of 15 listeners who used interval scaling, direct magnitude estimation with standard/modulus, and direct magnitude estimation without standard/modulus. The results indicated that the two sets of direct magnitude estimation scale values were related to the interval scale values in the curvilinear fashion that is typical of prothetic continua. These findings suggest that direct magnitude estimation is preferable to interval scaling for measuring stuttering severity.