Older adults’ performance on the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ): Test-retest reliability and a comparison of interview and self-administration methods

Abstract

Abstract

The purposes of the study were to examine the test-retest properties of the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) and to determine if the method of test administration affected these properties. Four groups of 40 older adult participants completed the SSQ twice at an interval of about a half year, using either the same or different administration methods at the two test times. The SSQ was administered using an interview method and/or it was self-administered and then returned by mail. Although the method of test administration did not systematically affect scores on the SSQ, the highest test-retest correlation (r = 0.83) was observed using the interview method at both test times, making it the best choice for the purpose of demonstrating the effectiveness of interventions. The other three combinations of dual-administration in this study also provided reliable results and may be preferable because the self-administration method is less time-consuming and labour-intensive. In conclusion, both the interview and self-administration methods are recommended, but with the best choice depending on the goals of the tester.

Sumario

El propósito de este estudio fue examinar las propiedades test-retest de la escala de audición del habla, espacial y de cualidades (SSQ) y determinar si el método de administración de la prueba afecta esas propiedades. Cuatro grupos de 40 participantes adultos mayores completaron el SSQ dos veces con un intervalo de cerca de medio año, usando (tanto) el mismo o un diferente método de administración en los dos tiempos de la prueba. El SSQ se administró usando un método de entrevista y/o por la auto aplicación y luego, enviado por correo. No obstante que el método de administración de la prueba no afectó sistemáticamente las puntuaciones del SSQ, la mayor correlación test-retest (r = 0.83) se observó usando el método de entrevista en los dos tiempos de la prueba, haciendo de él la mejor selección para demostrar la efectividad de las intervenciones. Las otras tres combinaciones de la administración doble en este estudio, dieron resultados confiables y pueden ser preferibles, porque el método de auto aplicación consume menos tiempo y requiere menor trabajo intensivo. En conclusión, se recomiendan tanto los métodos de entrevista como el de auto aplicación, pero la mejor selección dependerá de las metas del examinador.

Key Words:

• Aging
• Psycho-social/emotional
• speech perception
• psychoacoustics/hearing Science

Acknowledgements

This research was made possible through the support of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-15359) (STP-53875). We would like to thank Huiwen Goy, Agnes Jakubczyk, Lulu Li, and Robert Quelch for their invaluable help as research assistants, the research participants for their effort and generous contributions of time, and Michael Akeroyd, Graham Naylor, Bill Noble, and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.