PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

N G Bountress

Publications and source records attributed to N G Bountress.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1990

An examination of two procedures for assessing the speech perception of phonologically disordered children.

Speech perception is an important variable in children's production of speech sounds, yet commercially available tests of speech-sound discrimination have been criticized for their lack of validity and clinical value. The present study was undertaken to examine two alternative procedures for assessing children's perception of their own error sounds to determine if the procedures have clinical applicability and if they elicit comparable results. Implications of results are discussed.

Articulation Disorders↗
PubMed1989

Relationship between two nontraditional procedures for assessing speech-sound discrimination.

Test of speech-sound discrimination are used by special educators, reading specialists and speech-language pathologists in assessing children's ability to differentiate between speech sounds occurring in standard English. Such tests are important in determining if speech-sound articulation errors are caused by difficulty in making such differentiations. However, during the past 10 years, these tests have been criticized on the basis of their reliability and validity. The purpose of this study was to examine the use of two alternative methods of assessing speech-sound discrimination with a school-aged population to determine if they elicited responses in a similar manner.

Child↗
PubMed1984

A second look at tests of speech-sound discrimination.

This study is an extension of an earlier study conducted by Bountress and Laderberg (1981), which compared the performances of a group of children on two tests of speech-sound discrimination, the Wepman test and Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock test. The present study consisted of two treatments: The dual administration of the Boston University Speech Sound Discrimination Test and Wepman, and the Boston and Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock to two groups of 25 children. An analysis of the results of the two treatments indicated that, as was the case in Bountress and Laderberg's original research comparing the Wepman and Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock, neither the Boston or Wepman nor the Boston or Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock comparisons provided evidence that they are comparable measures of speech-sound discrimination. The results of both studies are analyzed, and implications are discussed.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1981

A comparison of two tests of speech-sound discrimination.

This study was conducted for the purpose of comparing two tests of speech-sound discrimination which are commonly used by speech-language clinicians, the Wepman and Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock. In particular, it was the purpose of the study to ascertain whether the tests were significantly comparable measures of speech-sound discrimination. Both tests were administered to a group of 22 5-yr-old subjects who did not present speech, language, auditory, neurological, learning, or behavioral disorders or obvious dialectal variations. An analysis of the results indicated that the Wepman and Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock tests were not comparable measures of speech-sound discrimination and that the Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock was a harsher measure of that skill. Implications of these results are discussed.

Child, Preschool↗