Untrained listeners' ratings of speech disorders in a group with cleft palate: a comparison with speech and language pathologists‚ ratings

References

• Altman D. G. Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman & Hall, London 1991
   Google Scholar
• Bagnall A. D., David D. J. Speech results of cleft palate surgery: two methods of assessment. British Journal of Plastic Surgery 1988; 41: 488–495
   Google Scholar
• Berry L. A., Witt P. D., Marsh J. L., Pilgram T. K., Eder R. A. Personality attributions based on speech samples of children with repaired cleft palates. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 1997; 34: 385–389
   Google Scholar
• Blood G. W., Hyman M. Children's perception of nasal resonance. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1977; 42: 446–448
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bloom K., Zajac D. J., Titus J. The influence of nasality of voice on sex‐stereotyped perceptions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 1999; 23: 271–281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunnegård K., Lohmander A. A cross‐sectional study of speech in 10‐year‐old children with cleft palate: results and issues of rater reliability. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 2007; 44: 33–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cecilgård M., Lindberg K. Logopeders och lågstadielärares reaktioner på öppen nasalering — försök till en jämförande studie. 1980, Master's thesis, Karolinska institutet, Huddinge
   Google Scholar
• Counihan D. T., Cullinan W. L. Reliability and dispersion of nasality ratings. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 1970; 7: 261–270
   Google Scholar
• Dagenais P. A., Brown G. R., Moore R. E. Speech rate effects upon intelligibility and acceptability of dysarthric speech. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2006; 20: 141–148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagenais P. A., Watts C. R., Turnage L. M., Kennedy S. Intelligibility and acceptability of moderately dysarthric speech by three types of listeners. Journal of Medical Speech–Language Pathology 1999; 7: 91–96
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finizia C., Lindstrom J., Dotevall H. Intelligibility and perceptual ratings after treatment for laryngeal cancer: laryngectomy versus radiotherapy. Laryngoscope 1998; 108: 138–143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fransson U. Logopeders och naiva lyssnares bedömningar av talet hos barn med och utan läpp‐käk‐gomspalt. 2002, Master's thesis, Umeå University, Umeå
   Google Scholar
• International Phonetic Association. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A Guide to the Use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999
   Google Scholar
• Kent R. D. Hearing and believing: some limits to the auditory–perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders. American Journal of Speech–Language Pathology 1996; 5: 7–23
   Google Scholar
• Kreiman J., Gerratt B. R., Precoda K. Listener experience and perception of voice quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1990; 33: 103–115
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kreiman J., Gerratt B. R., Precoda K., Berke G. S. Individual differences in voice quality perception. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1992; 35: 512–520
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lallh A. K., Rochet A. P. The effect of information on listeners' attitudes toward speakers with voice or resonance disorders. Journal of Speech–Language and Hearing Research 2000; 43: 782–795
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis K. E., Watterson T. L., Houghton S. M. The influence of listener experience and academic training on ratings of nasality. Journal of Communication Disorders 2003; 36: 49–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohmander A., Olsson M. Methodology for perceptual assessment of speech in patients with cleft palate: a critical review of the literature. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 2004; 41: 64–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin R. R., Haroldson S. K., Triden K. A. Stuttering and speech naturalness. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1984; 49: 53–58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McKinnon S. L., Hess C. W., Landry R. G. Reactions of college students to speech disorders. Journal of Communication Disorders 1986; 19: 75–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Brian S., Packman A., Onslow M., Cream A., O'Brian N., Bastock K. Is listener comfort a viable construct in stuttering research?. Journal of Speech–Language and Hearing Research 2003; 46: 503–509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onslow M., Adams R., Ingham R. Reliability of speech naturalness ratings of stuttered speech during treatment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1992; 35: 994–1001
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Persson C., Lohmander A., Jonsson R., Oskarsdottir S., Söderpalm E. A prospective cross‐sectional study of speech in patients with the 22q11 deletion syndrome. Journal of Communication Disorders 2003; 36: 13–47
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Riski J. E. Minimal standards in speech/language pathology, craniofacial outcomes registry approach, American Cleft Palate‐Craniofacial Association Database. 2001, Paper presented at the 9th International Congress on Cleft Palate and Related Craniofacial Anomalies
   Google Scholar
• Santelmann L., Sussman J., Chapman K. Perception of middorsum palatal stops from the speech of three children with repaired cleft palate. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 1999; 36: 233–242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sell D. Issues in perceptual speech analysis in cleft palate and related disorders: a review. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 2005; 40: 103–121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starr C. D., Moller K. T., Dawson W., Graham J., Skaar S. Speech ratings by speech clinicians, parents and children. Cleft Palate Journal 1984; 21: 286–292
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tönz M., Schmid I., Graf M., Mischler‐Heeb R., Weissen J., Kaiser G. Blinded speech evaluation following pharyngeal flap surgery by speech pathologists and lay people in children with cleft palate. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopedia 2002; 54: 288–295
   Google Scholar
• Van As, C J. Tracheoesophageal speech: a multidimensional assessment of voice quality. 2001, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
   Google Scholar
• Van As, C J., Koopmans‐van Beinum, F. J., Pols L. C., Hilgers F. J. Perceptual evaluation of tracheoesophageal speech by naive and experienced judges through the use of semantic differential scales. Journal of Speech–Language and Hearing Research 2003; 46: 947–959
   Google Scholar
• Whitehill T. L. Assessing intelligibility in speakers with cleft palate: a critical review of the literature. Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal 2002; 39: 50–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witt P. D., Berry L. A., Marsh J. L., Grames L. M., Pilgram T. K. Speech outcome following palatoplasty in primary school children: do lay peer observers agree with speech pathologists?. Plastic Reconstruction Surgery 1996; 98: 958–965, discussion, 966–970
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Witt P. D., Miller D. C., Marsh J. L., Muntz H. R., Grames L. M., Pilgram T. K. Perception of postpalatoplasty speech differences in school‐age children by parents, teachers, and professional speech pathologists. Plastic Reconstruction Surgery 1997; 100: 1655–1663
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health. World Health Organization, Geneva 2002, ICF Vol. 2007 (available at: http://www3.who.int/icf/beginners/bg.pdf) (accessed February 2007)
   Google Scholar