An initial investigation into the validity of a computer-based auditory processing assessment (Feather Squadron)

Abstract

Objective: This research investigates a novel method for identifying and measuring school-aged children with poor auditory processing through a tablet computer. Design: Feasibility and test-retest reliability are investigated by examining the percentage of Group 1 participants able to complete the tasks and developmental effects on performance. Concurrent validity was investigated against traditional tests of auditory processing using Group 2. Study sample: There were 847 students aged 5 to 13 years in group 1, and 46 aged 5 to 14 years in group 2. Results: Some tasks could not be completed by the youngest participants. Significant correlations were found between results of most auditory processing areas assessed by the Feather Squadron test and traditional auditory processing tests. Test-retest comparisons indicated good reliability for most of the Feather Squadron assessments and some of the traditional tests. Conclusions: The results indicate the Feather Squadron assessment is a time-efficient, feasible, concurrently valid, and reliable approach for measuring auditory processing in school-aged children. Clinically, this may be a useful option for audiologists when performing auditory processing assessments as it is a relatively fast, engaging, and easy way to assess auditory processing abilities. Research is needed to investigate further the construct validity of this new assessment by examining the association between performance on Feather Squadron and objective evoked potential, lesion studies, and/or functional imaging measures of auditory function.

Key Words:

• Behavioral measures
• pediatric
• psychoacoustics/hearing science
• speech perception

Acknowledgements

We wish to extend a very big thank you to the trained volunteers that collected the data for this research, as well as the school boards, principals, teachers, parents and students who participated.

Declaration of interest: Dr. Suzanne Purdy declares no disclosures or conflicts of interest. Dr. Matthew Barker is partial owner and developer of the new research tool analysed here.