ll ! 1 IHIIH l i H I I | fl 127 281 THS THE EFFEC‘E‘S 53F VISUAi. GEER? ’ATEQN ON 50‘! n. a p. .,.~ a.“ . .. :zsvfirkmfiim §*§*;{E°-£.-KF'AANLE Thesis for fin 39990 of M. A. . QifHESEAM S?fi“£"9 Ltréé'v’fiRSHY LIBRARY Michigan Sm: U-‘nnity Page 1 of 2 ABSTRACT THEeEFFECTS 0F VISUAL DEPRIVATION 0N LIPREADING PERFORMANCE by Barbara E. Subar The purpose of this study is to analyze the effects of visual stimuli deprivation on the lipreading performance of trained subjects. ‘ Subjects participating in this study were twelve females having at least a high school education, normal hearing and vision and no formal training in lipreading. Silent motion-picture films were made of a speaker, saying the first twenty-five words of a list of most fre- quently spoken words determined by Voelker.1 An eight second interval between each word allowed the subjects time to record each word on an answer sheet. Four different films were employed, each consisted of the same vocabulary but with the word order randomized. The visual clues given for each word were varied on the three test films. Subjects Were trained on specially prepared films until they recog- nized a minimum of ninety per cent of the vocabulary. 1c. H. Voelker, "The One Thousand Most Frequent s ken- words," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 28 (1942), pp. 189- 97. rlf——"' Barbara E. Subar Page 2 of 2 The findings of this study indicate that the lip- reading performance of trained subjects does not differ significantly as they are deprived of fifteen, thirty and forty-five per cent of the visual stimuli. THE EFFECTS OF VISUAL DEPRIVATION 0N LIPREADING PERFORMANCE By . D L) if} 5))“ Barbara EJ’Subar A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements . for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS College of Communication Arts, Department of Speech "1963 TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTOFTABLESOOOQOoooe'oeoeoooooo LIST OF Chapter I. II. III. V. APPEIJDICES O O O O O O O O O O. O O O O O 0 STATEMENT OFTHE PROBLEM. e o o o o o o o IntrOdUCtioneeeeoeooeooooo Statement of Problem and Purpose of Study Specific Questions Posed . . Importance of Study . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . The Importance Of Lipreading o o e o o 0 Factors Influencing Lipreading . . The Effect of Visual Perception on Lipreadin The Effect of Deprivation of Stimuli . . . . SUBJECTS, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND PROCEDURE Subjects . . E qui pme nt 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Procedures . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . .I. . . . Resuits ...........‘..... Discu351oncoooooooooooooo SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary 0 o o o 0 Conclusions . . . Recommendations . BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 ii Page iii iv Homo o brmmw H +4 rabah' r» ta a; xenon: to NH moo N NNN N \1 “VIP -l-" N \O LIST OF TABLES Table ’ Page 10 AnaIYSiSOfvarianceeeoeooeooooooe 19 2. Results of 2 Test for Differences Between Total Number of Errors in Two Syllable WOrds for Three Deprivation Levels . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3. Results~of 2_Test for Differences Between Total Number of Errors in Three Syllable werds for Three Deprivation Levels 0 o o o o o o o o o o 21 iii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. List of Fifty Mbst Frequently Spoken-words . 30 B. Practice List Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 C. AnswerSheetForm............. 32 D. Training Films . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 33 . E. WOrk Order for Film #1 . . . . . . . . . . . 3h F. WOrk Order for’Film.#2 . . . . . . . . . . . 35 G. werk Order for Film #3 . . . . . . . . . . . 36 H. Raw Score of Correctly Identified Nerds at Three Deprivation Levels . . . . . . . . . 37 I. Raw Score of Two Syllable werds Incorrectly Identified at Three Deprivation Levels . . 38 J. Raw Score of Three Syllable Wbrds Incorrectly Identified at Three Deprivation Levels . . 39 iv CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction The human being spends much of his time in communi- cation with others. When hearing loss occurs it interferes with communication. "Man is normally endowed with five physical senses. They are sometimes likened to windows and doors through which he gains knowledge and experience. These senses have to be trained, and should one be lost, or disabled, those remaining must be trained to take its place."1 Man inhErently feels a bond between himself and others; a bond which he strengthens through communication. The person with a hearing problem depends a great deal on lipreading as his way to keep this bond of communication alive. "Lipreading, however, is not hearing, but it is making use of our remembrance of speech together with our imagina- tion in applying it to what we Can see."2 lIrene R. Ewing, Li readin and Hearin Aids (Man- chester: Manchester University ress, h , p. h. 2M. Faircloth, Li readin Stud and Practice (Toronto: Ryerson Press, l9h6), p. vIII. 1 2 Studies in visual perceptibility of speech and its relationship to lipreading are needed to aid in solving the many exacting problems in the education of the hearing im- pared person. It is true that numerous investigations have already been undertaken in the area of lipreading; but very few of these have concerned themselves with the relationship between lipreading and visual skills. Statement of Problem and Purpgse of Study The area of investigation from which this study arose is that of visual perception. The purpose of this study was to investigate and analyze the effects, if any, of prede— termined deprivation of visual stimuli on a group of trained lipreaders. From the investigation and analysis it is hOped that the following general questions can be answered: Is the ability to recognize a word in a motion picture disturbed by depriving the viewer of a specific amount of the filmed visual stimulus? How much of the stimulus may be deprived from a word while still allowing the word to be recognized? Specific Questions Posed 1. Is there a significant variation in the subject performance among the three levels of visual stimuli deprivation? 2. 3. A. 5. 6. 7. 8. . 3 Is there a significant difference in lipreading performance between fifteen per cent and thirty per cent conditions of stimulus deprivation? Is there a significant difference in lipreading performance between thirty per cent and forty- five per cent conditions of stimulus deprivation? Is there a significant difference in lipreading performance between fifteen per cent and forty- five per cent conditions of stimulus deprivation? Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the second deprivation level for two syllable words? Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third depri- vation level for two syllable words? Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the second deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third depri- vation level for two syllable words? _ Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the second depri- vation level for three syllable words? A. 9. Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third depri- vation level for three syllable words? 10. Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the second deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third depri- vation level for three syllable words? Impgrtance of Stgdy Little is understood concerning perception of visual signals available on the faces of speakers. This writer knows of no research data that shows how much or how little of a visual signal is necessary for the trained viewer to make correct identification of a word. It is anticipated that this study will provide such basic data and will cause further interest in investigating the visual perception of speech and its relationship to the amount of visual informa- tion available. Definition of Term For the purpose of this study, the terms used are defined in the following manner: Lipreading.--The ability to recognize specific words as they are presented in a motion picture without sound re- production. 5 Sngllen Vision Test.-4A chart consisting of alphabet symbols that are pictured in varying sizes. Visual acuity for distance is determined by the Size of the letter a per- son is able to read at a specific distance from the chart. Normal Vigion.--The ability to pass the Snellen Vision test at a distance of 20 feet. Normal vision in this paper may also signify persons who have vision corrected to 20/20 with glasses. Noppgl Hearing.--The ability to hear pure tones at . 15 decibels at frequencies of 250, 500, 1000, 2000, L000 and 8000 cycles per second. [ppgpplg§y.--The words used in this study were taken from ”The One Thousand Most Frequently Spoken Words."3 w— 3Charles H. Voelker, "The One Thousand Most Frequent S ken-words," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 28 (19A2), pp. 1 9-197 0 CHAPTER II REVIEW 0]? THE LITERATURE The Impprtance of Lipreading Some have thought that lipreading was a skill belong- ing only to those people who had hearing impairments. O'Neill, in an investigation, found that all persons, those with or without hearing problems, unconsciously use lipreading as an aid to hearing.1 Lowell agrees with this by saying, ". . . despite wide individual difference almost everyone can lipread to some extent and a good many people can get most of a simple conversation by lipreading alone."2 From the literature it may be assumed that lipreading is of im- portance to almost every person who communicates with an- other. Factors Influencing Lipreading Many investigations in the area of lipreading have been conducted; however, it is apparent that no single ‘— 1J. J. O'Neill, "Contributions of the Visual Compon- ents of Oral Symbols to Speech Comprehension," Journal of Sppech and Begging Diporders, l9 (l95h), pp. h2§-h3§. 2E. L. Lowell, ”New In-sight into Lipreading," 32: habilitation R co d, II (July-August, 1961), p. h. 6 7 element is the lone determinant of lipreading skills. A wide range of factors must be considered in order to deter- mine the proficiency of a lipreader. Intelligence has been considered as a variable in- volved in lipreading ability. Simmons reported that she found no significant correlation between lipreading and intelligence.3 Visual memory span, another factor, was studied by O'Neill and Davidson. They found that when using a group of numbers as test materials there was no relation- ship between 1ipreading and visual memory span.“ Little relationship was found between lipreading and synthetic ability as tested by letter prediction.5 The early research done by Kitson sought to differentiate be- tween synthetic and analytic types of perception. Kitson believed that the synthetic type would make lipreading easier.6 3Audrey Ann Simmons, “Factors.Related to Lipreading," gogrnal pf Sppech and Hparing Research, 2 (1959), pp. 3h0- 5 . ‘ hJ. J. O'Neill and Joan Davidson, "Relationship Be~ tween Lipreading Ability and Five Psychological Factors," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 21 (1956), p. #80. 5Corrine Tatoul and G. Don Davidson, "Lipreading and Letter Prediction," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, A (1961), p. 181. 6Ruldolf Pintner, Jon Eisenson and Mildred Stanton, The P3 cholo of Ph sicall Handica ed (New York: Apple- ton-Century-Erofts, I§h1). pp. TIA-Th5. .- 8 Rate was studied as a variable in lipreading by Byers and Lieberman. These investigators found that a rate vari- able is not significant in lipreading performance, neither in terms of the number of correct reSponses nor the number of words produced.7 Hulligan studied speed of projection and its effect on recognition of filmed material. She found that when the rate of projection was decreased by one-third the subjects were able to correctly identify more of the test material.8 It would appear that more research in this area is indicated due to discrepancies among the existing studies. It should be noted, however, that the Byers and Lieberman test was done with words per minute as their base whereas the Mulli- gan test was based in terms of frames per second. Black,9 in a study that was concerned with the ease with which various words could be lipread, found that cer- tain words were more easily lipread due to placement of the 7Vincent W. Byers and Lewis Lieberman, "Lipreading Performance and The Rate of The Speaker," Journal of S eech and Hearing Research, 2 (1959), pp. 271-276. 8M. Mulligan, "Variables in the Reception of Visual Speech from Motion Pictures" (unpublished.Master's thesis, Ohio State University, Department of Speech, l95h), cited by O'Neill and Dyer, op. cit., pp. hB-hh. 9John W. Black, "Accompaniments of Word Intelligibil- ity," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 17 (1952), pp . [$09-41,] o 9 accent in the word and also to the type of sounds which the word contained. Lowell suggests that a main factor in lipreading is the reception of the words seen. He found that there was a definite improvement in lipreading scores as the reader was able to see the speakers face. Lowell also believed that a non smiling face was easier to lipread. The reason he offered for this is as follows: "the unsmiling face, with lips firmly closed between sentences, definitely in- dicates the start and duration of the message."10 Expectancy is another factor contributing to ability in lipreading. Lowell's study indicated that the parts of speech vary in their ability to be lipread, the order of difficulty from the most easy to the most difficult is as follows: pronoun, verb, noun, adverb, adjective, preposi- tion and conjunEtion.11 The Effect of Visual Perception on Lipreading Vernon, while discussing visual perception, states that if the pre and post exposure fields are dark, it is easier to perceive the stimulus.12 In speaking of perception 10Lowell, o . cit., p. #- 11Ibid., p. h. 12M. D. Vernon, Visual Perce tion (London: Cambridge at the University Press, 37 , p. . 10 of written materials, he continues, ". . . we do not need to perceive clearly and in detail every letter, or even every word, but are able to pick up vague outlines or structures of words and phrases which are a sufficient clue for per- ceiving and apprehending of the meaning of the words."13 Fusfeld found that ". . . the most skillful deaf adults do not grasp every word spoken on the lips.”14 He further states, they perceive ". . . and recognize only the key words and then 'fill in' the elliptical portions which represent the hidden throat and nasal speech e1ements."l5 While studying the field of perception and its rela- tionship with reading; Thurstone said, "reading evidently consists in filling in the words and their meaning from the bare fragments of the outlines."16 It is believed that the idea which is introduced here could also be applied to visual perception and lipreading. Fusfeld reports, that ". . . every single picture in the moving panorama of‘a moving picture is actually forming lBIbido , p. 500 lhIrving S. Fusfeld, "Factors in Lipreadin as Deter- g mined by the Lipreader," American Annals of the Deaf, 103 (1958), p. 229. .__..___......__._.______ lslbide, p. 2290 16L. L. Thurstone, A Factorial Stud of Perce tion (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944), p. 12. ‘- 11 part of a visual screen even though it remains visible for only a very fleeting fraction of time."17 The Effect of Deprivation of §timuli Lipreading is not the only area of communication that is effected by deprivation of stimuli. The effects could also be studied, in the areas of reading and hearing. To illustrate this point the following examples may be cited: A man joins a group of people discussing a particular topic. Although, the man may have missed as much as five minutes of the discussion, it is not likely that he will be greatly confused by having been absent for that length of time. A word is printed on a chalkboard, then the portion of the letters which are above the midline in print- ing are erased. The reader is thereby deprived of certain visual stimuli, yet, in many instances he is still able to discern the correct word. A sentence could be printed omitting all the letter e's and instead use the letter x. The sentence would still be intelligible to the reader. An example of this might be: Now is thx timx for all good mxn to comx to thx aid of thxir country. Each of these illustrations has suggested a specific type of deprivation of stimuli. The examples also show that the effect on the final task was not sufficient to cause a habitual faulty response. l7Fusfeld, o . cit., p. 230. 18O'Neill and Dyer, op. cit., pp. 43-44. CHAPTER III SUBJECTS, EQUIPMENT, AND TESTING PROCEDURES Subjects The subject population consisted of twelve females with an age range of eighteen to fifty-two years. Each subject had at least a high school education but no for- malized training in lipreading prior to this experiment. Eguipment .- Vision Screening Device (Snellen E Chart—Green Test Cabinet Model 20). Audiometer (BeltoneeModel 100, with Telephonics TDH- 39 Earphones). Sound Pressure Level Meter (MSA Soundscope, Model B). Light Meter (Spectra Gold Seal Exposure Meter, Model 3-500). ' Movie Projector (Bell-Howell 16 mm. Model #173). Lens (Incredlite 3 inch, r/2 16 mm. Bell-Howell). Screen (Radiant Screen 4 feet by 4 feet). Training film.--A silent, motion picture training film was constructed especially for this study. A female speaker was photographed saying twenty-five words. The 12 , 13 speaker was placed full face forward with only her head and part of her neck showing. Each word on the film was sepa- rated by an eight second interval. The experimenter used 16 mm. black and white film run at normal speed of 24 frames per second. The complete training film was 7 minutes and 18 seconds in length. Procedures I. Filming.--The vocabulary employed in this study was selected from the first fifty words in Voelker's study of most frequent-spoken words.1 The first twenty-five non- homophenous words were chosen for the film. One speakér was filmed saying the test materials. Care was taken so that the speaker would be seen in a closed mouth position briefly before and after the-completion of each word. The words were said with voice to avoid exager- ation of the lips while speaking. No films used in this experiment had sound reproduction. Four different films were constructed. Each film had the same vocabulary, although the word sequence was not the same in any two films. The order in which the words were presented was determined by the use of a table of random 1Voelker, op. cit., pp. 189-197. 14 numbers.2 The films varied in length from 7 minutes and 7 seconds to 7 minutes and 12 seconds. II. Preparation of Test Films.--Films were prepared in such a manner so as to deprive the subjects of a specific amount of information. The first film in the test series was constructed so as to deprive the viewer of fifteen per cent of the visual clues. This was done in the following manner: (1) A count was made of the frames necessary to perceive the complete word. (2) Five frames showing the closed mouth position was added to the beginning and end of each word. (3) A new total of frames was computed. (4) A number representing fifteen per cent of the total amount of frames was determined. (5) A table of random numbers was used to record which frames would be eliminated from the film. (6) Black marking ink was used to block out the frames selected for elimination. In the same way the second and third films were pre- pared so as to deprive the viewers of thirty per cent and forty-five per cent of the stimuli respectively. III. Training of Subjects.--The subjects were trained in two groups of six persons each. The six chairs upon which they sat were placed in a row with each chair being 2E. F. Lindquist, Desi n and Analysis of Eyperiments in Psychology and Education (Eoston: Houg ton i In 00., 5.13035- 15 ten feet from the center of the motion picture screen. The chairs were separated by approximately two and one half feet as measured from the middle of one seat to the middle of the next seat. A The films were seen in a partially lighted double classroom which was partitioned so as to allow only a small amount of light into the front part of the room. This light was necessary to allow the subjects to record the test in- formation on their answer sheets. The windows of the room were darkened by heavy shades. The same classroom was used for the training and ex- perimental portions of this<駧§§£> The projector was approximately eleven feet from the center of the screen. A three inch lens was employed that - allowed the image on the screen to be life size. The day before the training sessions began, each subject was presented with the twenty-five words which were to be used in the study. A copy of the word list may be found in the Appendix. A different word order was used on the training film and the word list. The inStructions which follow were given before the showing of both the training and the test films. After viewing each word on the film you are to write the word on your answer sheet. YOu will have an eight second interval between each word on the film in which to do this. If you have no idea what the 16 word is, be sure and draw a line through the space on the answer sheet. This is important so that the words are not misnumbered on your paper. If you do not know the word do not waste time thinking about it. The time wasted may cause you to miss the next word on the screen. < The training film was shown and the papers were scored after each viewing. During the third and fourth viewings of the film the procedure was changed slightly, after the word was seen and the subjects had recorded their answers, the correct word was called out by the experimenter. Each subsequent showing of the training film was handled in this manner; a word was viewed, the projector was stopped, the word was called out by the examiner, the word was then seen again on the screen. In the second session the same training procedure was employed. A new word order was created by splicing the film. This, it was haped, would inhibit any memorization of the word order which might enable a person to pass the criteria without really knowing the words by sight. Six subjects were trained at a time. As a subject reached the criteria of ninety per cent of the vocabulary identified correctly, twice consecutively, he was able to proceed to the next part of the experiment. The subjects were given the final tests the day after they had reached the criteria standard. The training film was run once more to recheck the criteria standard, that is, of at least ninety per cent correct response. 17 The conditions for the training and the experiment were the same with one exception. A factor of visual de- privation was introduced in the experimental films. The subjects were trained atla specific time of day * which would coincide with the time of the testing. IV. TeSting.--The experimental procedures were con- ducted after the following directions were given to the subjects: Today the final tests will be given. The tests will be composed of the same word list. However, certain portions of the word will be blocked from view. This will appear as a black flash on the screen. You will be asked to identify as many of the words as possible. There are three test films. We will have a five min- ute break between each test film. It is essential that there be no talking or noise making during any of the viewing sessions. Do not look at your neighbor's paper. The instructions read at the first training session were again read at this time. The first test film deprived the viewer of fifteen per cent of the visual stimuli, the second and third films .deprived the viewer of thirty and forty-five per cent of the visual stimuli respectively. The word order for each film and the frames which were deleted from view may be found in the Appendix. The subjects wrote down the words they thought they saw. The papers were not scored until all three tests were completed. In scoring, there was no attempt to assign differ— ent weights to each word. Each item correct received one point. CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION -Results The objective of this study was to investigate and analyze the effects, if any, of predetermined deprivation of visual stimuli on a group of trained lipreaders. The number of correct word identifications for each subject at each visual deprivation level was tabulated and recorded. Table 1 represents the data obtained in response to ques- tions one through four as posed in Chapter I, namely: 1. Is there a significant variation in the subject perform- ance among the three levels of visual stimuli depriva- tion? 2. Is there a significant difference in lipreading perform- ance between fifteen per cent and thirty per cent con- ditions of stimulus deprivation? 3. Is there a significant difference in lipreading perform- ance between thirty per cent and forty-five per cent conditions of stimulus deprivation? A. Is there a significant difference in lipreading perform- ance between fifteen per cent and forty-five per cent conditions of stimulus deprivation? l8 19 Table l.--Analysis of Variance Source df 33 ms F Treatments 2 8.67 4.33 1.28* Subjects 11 150.33 13.64 4.05** Treatments X Subjects 22 74.00 3.36 fi— *With df equaling 2 and 22, an F value greater than 3.44 is required for significance at the .05 level. **With df equaling 11 and 22, an F value greater than 2.26 required for significance at the .05 level. A comparison was made of the differences between the total number of errors made in two syllable words at each of the visual deprivation levels. A similar compari- son was also made for three syllable words.. These data were needed to answer questions five through ten as posed in Chapter I. The questions were as follows: 5. Is there a difference between the error scores of sub- jects at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the second deprivation level for two syllable words? 6. Is there a difference between the error scores of sub- jects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third deprivation level for two syllable words? 7. 8. 9. 10. 20 Is there a difference between the error scores of sub- jects obtained at the second deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third deprivation level for two syllable words? Is there a difference between the error scores of sub- jects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the second deprivation level for three syllable words? Is there a difference between the error scores of subjects obtained at the first deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third deprivation level for three syllable words? Is there a difference between the error scores of sub— jects obtained at the Second deprivation level and the error score obtained at the third deprivation level for three syllable words? To analyze the data obtained in response to questions five through ten the following formula was employed:1 The results of this analysis are presented in Tables 2 and 3. lLindquist, op. cit., p. 59. 21 no. em Amen aoz mmo.- mu.~ man m.~ m Am mo. 95 OWHW S02 Nmaol “NON “HQ N HAD no. em .man eoz sma.- m.~ «an m age mocoeamcoo spoon M :moE Ho>oa gems He>oq no Hm>oq soupm>anmon soapm>anmoa mHo>oA nowpm>finaoa mouse pom memos oHpmHHhm mouse ma muchnm mo umpssz Hmpoe :moSpmm mooaopomman now puma 9 mo mpHfimoMnu.m magma no. on .wan :oz mHm. os.~ mac mm.m «an no. on .wam coz own. oe.m mgm mo.s HAD mo. pa .man eoz one. me.m Nan mo.e . Han oomoewwnoo spoon m new: Ho>og emmz Hm>oq no Ho>oq sowom>wnmoa coaum>wnaoa AAI A A A A A '11) mHo>oA nowpm>anmoa means no“ memo: manwaahm 039 a“ mpOAhm no nonasz annoy coozpmm neoconmmmwn new pmma 9 Ho mpasmmmua.m names 1 22 Discussion Table 1 shows a significant variation among subjects at the three deprivation levels studied. This fact is not surprising as one expects inter-subject variation. The table also shows no Significant difference among the three conditions studied. Table 2 presents the differences between the total number of errors in two syllable words for the three depri- vation levels. A comparison of the difference between the number of errors in the first and second deprivation levels revealed no significant difference. The mean error score for the 'first level was 4.08 and at the second level 3.69. No significant difference was noted in the comparison of difference between the mean errors in the first and third deprivation levels. The mean score for the third depriva- tion level was 2.46. No significant difference was found in the last com— parison made of differences between the errors in two syllable words. The second and third deprivation levels were ana- lyzed in this comparison. Table 3 presents the results of the p tests for differences between total number of errors in three syllable words at the three deprivation levels. The p tests in these comparisons again Showed no Sig- nificant differences. 23 It must be remembered when analyzing the data from this study that the subjects used were trained persons. Each person had reached at least ninety per cent perfection in identifying the test words before taking the final filmed tests. The results of this study would indicate that there V is no difference in lipreading performance when as much as forty-five per cent of the visual stimuli are removed from the viewer. It is certain, that at some point of deprivation there would be a Significant difference. However, this point was not indicated by the results of this study. It appears that additional learning took place during the course of the experiment even though the subjects were trained. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The purpose of this study has been to measure the differences in the lipreading performance of trained sub- jects as they were deprived specified amounts of the material to be lipread. A review of the literature concerning the effects of visual perception and lipreading indicate that some research has been done in this area. There has been no reported re- search, however, on the effects of deprivation of specified amounts of visual stimuli and lipreading performance. Twelve females participated as subjects in this study. Each person had at least a high school education. The Snellen Vision Test was employed to screen the sight of each subject and a pure-tone audiometric screening test was given at 15 decibels, for frequencies 250, 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 cycles per second. I Four different silent motion picture films were made showing a speaker, full-face forward, repeating twenty-five non-homophenous words taken from Voelker's study. The sub- jects were trained to read the test material until ninety 24 . 25 per cent of the words were correctly identified. An eight second interval separated each word, this period allowed the subjects time to record each word on the answer sheet. The training and experimental sessions were held in the same room and each meeting was at the same time of day. The light and sound conditions were held constant in each session. The subjects were presented all the test materials in one session. The test conditions required that the sub- jects lipread the vocabulary under the following amounts of visual deprivation, (l) fifteen per cent, (2) thirty per cent, and (3) forty-five per cent. The findings of this study indicated that the selected amount of visual deprivation used, did not significantly affect lipreading performance. Conclusions 1. The visual deprivation of stimuli employed in this study did not significantly affect lipreading performance. f 2. The differences between total error scores for two and three syllable words are not significant at any of the three deprivation levels. Recommendations It is recommended that future research be directed toward investigating recognizability of the same word list 26 by trained subjects under increasing amounts of visual de- privation and performance on a different word list composed of an equal amount of one, two, three and four syllable words. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Ewing, Irene R. Li readin and Hearin Aids. Manchester: .Manchester University PrSSS, 1945. Faircloth,.M. Li readin Stud and Practice. Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1943. - Lindquist, E. F. Desigp and Analysis of Exfipriments in Ps cholo and Education. oston: oughton-Mifflin Company, 1955. O'Neill, John J. and Dyer, Herbert J. Visual Communication for the Hard of He rin . Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-EaII, Inc., 1561. Pintner, Ruldolf, Eisenson, Jon and Stanton, Milton. 1131p Ps holo of Ph sicall Handica ed. New York: Appfeton-gentury-CrOTts, 1941. Thurstone, L. L. A Factorial Stud of Perce tion. Chicago: university of Chicago Press, 1944. Vernon,.M. D. Visual Perce tion. London:l Cambridge at the university Press, 1957. Articles and Periodicals Beyers, Vincent W. and Lieberman, Lewis. "Lipreading Per- formance and the Rate of the Speaker " Journal of .Sppech and Reaping Research, 2 (1959), 27I-275. Black, John W. "Accompaniments of Nerd Intelligibility," Journal of S eech and Hearin Disorders, 17 (1952), 4 -4 7% Fusfeld, Irving 3. "Factors in Lipreading as Determined by the Lipreader," American Annals of the Deaf, 103 (1958). 229-230. "'“””“"”"""” Lowell, E. L. "New In-si hts into Lipreading," Rehabilita- tion Record, 4 (l9 1), 4. 27 28 O'Neill, J. J. "Contributions of the Visual Components of ,Oral Symbols to Speech Comprehension," Journal of S ech and Hearin Disorders, 19 (1954), 429-139. O'Neill, J. J. and Davidson, Joan. "Relationship Between Lipreading Ability and Five Psychological Factors " Journal of S ech and Hearin Disorders, 21 (1956), 435. Simmons, Audrey Ann. "Factors Related to Lipreading," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 2 (1959), 3’00- 5 o Tatoul, Corrine and Davidson, G. Don. "Lipreading and Letter Prediction ” Journal of S ech and Hearin Research, 4 (1961), 131. Voelker, Charles H. "The One-Thousand.Most Fre uent Spoken- Words," Quartgrly Journal of Speech, 28 1942), 189'1970 ‘ APPENDICES 29 APPENDIX A LIST OF FIFTY MOST FREQUENTLY SPOKEN-WORDS The following word list was the vocabulary from which the test words were chosen. Nerds were taken from: Charles H. Voelker, "The One Thousand Most Frequent Spoken-Words," Quappprly Journal of Sppech, 28 (1942), pp. 189-197. 1. the 18. for 35. will 2. and 19. he 36. would 3. of 20. many 37. with a. a 21. you 38. which 5. to 22. we 39. people 6. in 23. one 40. more 7. it 24. an 41. light 8. is 25. as 42. very 9. that 26. not 43. at 10. have 27. if AA. by 11. this ' 28. make 45. man 12. be 29. on 46. these 13. work 30. there 47. can 14. I 31. was 48. so 15. are 32. or 49. his 16. they 33. all 50. time 17. do 34. but 30 APPENDIX B PRACTICE LIST FORM Lipreading Experiment Barbara Subar The following vocabulary will be used in an experi- ment concerned with lipreading skill. The results of the experiment are dependent upon your ability to identify these twenty-five words. Please familiarize yourself with this list. Look at the first word, repeat the word aloud while standing in front of a mirror. Note the movement of the lips for each word. we will meet in Room 235 of the Auditor- ium. YOu will be notified as to the dates and time of the experiment. 1. so 14. the 2. not 15. if 3. people ~ 16. all 4. that 17. very 5. we 18. you 6. many 19. I 7. with 20. of 8. in , 21. work 9. on I _ 22. this 10. and 23. are 11. a 24. be 12. but 25. to 13. for 31 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. APPENDIX C ANSWER SHEET FORM 32 Name APPENDIX D TRAINING FILMS Original Respliced 1. for 1. people 2. the a 2. so 3. very 3. are 4. not 4. for 5. but 5. the 6. on 6. very 7. work 7. to 8. peOple 8. if 9. so 9. I 10. are 10. not 11. that 11. but 12. this 12. on 13. many 13. work 14. be 14. that 15. a 15. this 16. we 16. many 17. you 17. of 18. in 18. and 19. all 19. in 20. with . 20. all 21. to 21. with 22. if ‘ 22. be 23. I 23. a 24. of 24. we 25. and 25. you 33 1. 2. h. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. the and of to in that this be work are for many you we not if on all but with peeple very 80 APPENDIX E WORK ORDER FOR FILM #1 No. of Frames 17 21 25 25 19 22 27 22 23 25 26 22 21 13 13 21 19 19 17 26 17 20 20 22 18 15% of Frampp 2.55 3.15 3.75 3.75 2.85 3.30 b.05 3.30 3.h5 - 3.75 3.90 3.30 3.15 1.95 1.95 3.15 2.85 2.85 2.55 3.90 2.55 3.00 3.00 3.30 2:70 34 ‘ Numbers to Delete 3 1o 11 7 14 16 1 5 1o 11 1 5 10 14 7 9 13 7 14 16 2 6 15 27 5 14 20 12 19 22 9 12 13 19 1 5 14 26 9 14 16 11 12 15 12 13 6 7 6 12 13 4 1o 17 7 8 11 7 13 14 7 8 15 17 5 7 17 3 A 10 6 9 l6 8 10 20 7 12 17 l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 25. this that so not in all for work to be the. you on and with if many of but people are very No. of Frames 21 21 19 24 19 18 1h 26 22 2h 22 16 21 18 21 22 .- 2h 31 23 28 l9 19 18 22 19 APPENDIX F WORK ORDER FOR FILM #2 30% of Frames 6.30 6.30 5.70 7.20 5.70 5.40 4.20 - 7.80 6.60 7.20 6.60 4.80 6.30 5.40 6.30 6.60 7.20 9.30 6.90 8.40 5.70 5.70 5.40 6.60 5.70 35 NHkl-‘NQNHU'INWQHPHNN?NNNHO\\I\J Numbers to Delete 9 12 13 19 21 12 19 20 21 11 14 15 16 7 8 10 11 2O 9 9 6 6 7 14 15 19 5 11 12 15 6 7 11 6 1o 12 13 22 23 25 5 7 9 10 19 22 5 7 13 17 19 20 2 4 7 11 16 20 6 12 13 16 5 7 14 20 21 1o 11 15 18 4 7 9 13 21 6 7 14 15 19 20 11 12 15 17 19 22 5 7 10 11 14 20 26 31 5 7 13 17 19 20 9 12 13 14 19 20 21 1 7 11 13 16 8 11 14 16 13 6 7 14 16 5 8 1o 11 14 20 7 9 12 13 19 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. we that so the but for very you to and not are be on if in with people work all many this of No. of Frames 19 25 22 24 21 21 22 25 24 17 21 _ 22 22 20 19 18 29 20 25 22 22 29 19 25 28 APPENDIX C WORD ORDER FOR FILM #3 45% of Frames 3.55 11.25 9.90 10.80 9.45 9.45 9.90 11.25 10.80 7.65 9.45 _ 9.90 9.90 9.00 8.55 8.10 13.04 9.00 11.25 9.90 9.90 13.04 8.55 11.25 12.60 Numbers to Delete w 0‘ be 14 k4 o~14 a- c- P' n: C: v: n>\»'4~ to to id e. n) F‘ A) no no N>1o unmomuqmmroatm-mmmrwwmmrm \J'l 6 7 9 14 15 l6 l7 7 9 14 13 14 17 19 20 21 7 9 10 12 13 16 21 22 7 9 11 12 13 16 17 19 20 7 11 13 16 17 19 20 4 10 11 12 15 17 19 4 6 8 9 14 15 19 21 7 10 11 12 14 16 18 23 25 3 4 5 7 11 13 16 17 20 7 9 12 13 14 17 10 11 12 15 17 19 21 7 8 10 11 14 19 20 21 8 9 1o 14 15 16 19 22 7 8 11 14 15 19 20 7 9 11 14 15 16 17 7 10 11 12 16 18 7 9 12 13 16 17 20 21 26 27 7 8 10 11 14 19 20 8 10 12 15 16 17 19 22 25 8 10 12 15 16 17 19 22 3 h 7 10 11 16 17 20 ll 12 13 14 15 16 18 20 24 26 29 3 h 7 10 11 16 17 3 4 5 7 ll 13 l6 17 19 8 11 14 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 APPENDIX H Raw Score of Correctly Identified W0rds at Three Deprivation Levels Subject DLl DL2 DL3 Number (15%) (30%) (45%) 1 16 20 17 2 16 18 18 3 21 20 20 4 19 16 21 5 13 18 15 6 19 18 20 7 17 14 15 8 19 17 21 9 16 .16 18 10 21 20 ‘ 28 11 20 22 23 12 19 21 13 APPENDIX I Raw Score of Two Syllable Werds Incorrectly Identified at Three Deprivation Levels Subject DLl D12 DL3 Number (15%) (30%) (45%) 1 5 4 6 2 6 ' 2 3 3 4 4 2 l. 4 5 2 5 8 5 5 6 4 5 3 7 2 7 3 3 5 4 3 9 _ 5 A 3 10 3 3 0 11 3 2 1 12 4 2 3 38 APPENDIX J Raw Score of Three Syllable Nerds Incorrectly Identified at Three Deprivation Levels Subject DLl D12 DL3 Number (15%) (30%) (45%) 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 3 0 0 2 4 1 2 1 5 3 1 3 6 l 2 l 7 2 2 4 8 0 2 1 9 3 4 3 10 1 1 1 11 1 0 o 12 1 o 3 l 39 A TATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES Illllll |||||H i MIC|.‘H I III lijl 293 03146 1670 3