(GM {NVESYEGATEQN <3!“- Ax’E’aE AS A FACTOR EN THE
1' ESTBNG OF ;$E7L?S Wfi'i'i THE Cit-C! AUDWOR‘.‘
":‘EST V9322-

?hesis fer i‘ha 939mg 0? M. A.
MlCHtGAH STAYE UNEVERSE‘W
Margaref Brambie
1964

THESIS

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

ABSTRACT

AN INVESTIGATION OF AGE AS A FACTOR IN
THE TESTING OF ADULTS WITH THE
CID AUDITORY TEST W-22

by Margaret Bramble

The purpose of this study is to analyze the speech
discrimination ability of adults within seven age levels
as measured by the CID Auditory Test w-22.

The subjects for this study were eighty-four adults
between the ages of sixteen and fifty. Each listened to
one of the following word lists (l-C, 2—C, 3-0, 4—C, l-D,
2-D, 3-D, 4-D, l-F, 2—F, 3-F, A-F) from the standardized
recordings of the CID Auditory Test W—22 presented at 50
decibels (re: 0.002 dyne/cm2). Tests were administered
individually with responses recorded on prepared answer
sheets.

An analysis of variance indicates that there is no
significant variation among age groups at the five per cent
level of confidence. There is no systematic change in means
or in deviation from the means as age increases.

Based on these findings, the following conclusion
is made. Age is not a factor in testing the speech dis-
crimination ability of adults sixteen to fifty with the CID

Auditory Test w-22.

Margaret Bramble

Every group of adults in this study performed better
than did any group of children tested by Nielsenl or
McNamee2 with the CID Auditory Test W-22. Some possible.
reasons for the difference in scores are degree of neuro-
logical development, amount of listening experience,

familiarity with vocabulary, and differences in testing

procedure.

 

lKaren Nielsen, ”Speech Sound Discrimination of Pre—
School Children as Measured by the CID Auditory Test W—22”
(unpublished Master's dissertation, Department of Speech,
Michigan State University, 1961).

2Joan McNamee, "An Investigation of the Use of the CID
Auditory Test W—22 with Children' (unpublished Master's
dissertation, Department of Speech, Ohio State University,
1960).

AN INVESTIGATION OF AGE AS A
FACTOR IN THE TESTING OF ADULTS

WITH THE CID AUDITORY TEST w—22
By

Margaret Bramble

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of speech

1964

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
Chapter
I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .

Introduction . .

Statement of Problem and Purpose
of Study

Hypothesis . .

Importance of Study

Definition of Terms . .

Organization of the Thesis

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .

The DevelOpment of Speech Reception
Tests .

DevelOpmentoof. the CID Auditory
Test W- 22. . . . . . . .
Presbycusis. . . . . . . . .

III. SUBJECTS, EQUIPMENT AND TESTING PROCEDURES

Subjects . . . . . . . .
Equipment . . . . . .
Materials
Procedure

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results
Discussion .

ii

Page
iv

[—4

(I) '\]O\U1U‘lf\) i—'

ll
13

l9

19
19

2O
22

22
32

Page

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . 37
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . 38
Implications for Further Research . . 39

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

iii

Table

II.

III.

LIST OF TABLES

Standard Deviations for Age Groups
Standard Deviations for Word Lists

Total Variance Subdivided into Two
Components . . . . .

iv

Page
28
29

3O

Figure

LIST OF FIGURES

Mean Correct ReSponses by Age Groups on
the CID Auditory Test W—22

Mean Correct ReSponses by Word List on
the CID Auditory Test W-22

Median Correct Responses by Age Groups
on the CID Auditory Test W—22

Median Correct ReSponses by Word List
on the CID Auditory Test W—22

Comparison of Means of Age Groups of
Nielsen, McNamee and Bramble

Page

23

24

26

27

32

CHAPTER I

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Introduction

 

In the past twenty-five years the use of speech
reception tests has greatly increased. They have not
replaced pure tone tests but have served as an adjunct to
them. As a valid estimate of day-to—day hearing they give
a diagnosis and prognosis not given by pure tone tests.l

Speech reception tests are of two types: (1) tests
determining the threshold of intelligibility and (2) speech
discrimination tests. The Speech discrimination tests
measure the ability of a subject to correctly hear Speech
sounds presented at sufficient intensity so that intensity
itself is not a factor in scoring.2

This paper is concerned with Speech discrimination
testing. Specifically it deals with the CID Auditory Test
W-22. Age as a factor affecting test scores will be the

focus.

 

lOscar Ferrer, "Speech Audiometry: A Discrimination
Test for Spanish Language,” Laryngoscope, 70 (1960), 1541-
1542.

 

QLeland A. Watson and Thomas Tolan, Hearing Tests
and Hearing Instruments (Baltimore: The Williams and
Wilkins Company, 19A9), 439.

 

 

 

 

Statement of Problem and Purpose of Study

Presbycusis is a term long used to describe the
hearing loss associated with aging. This appears to be a
rather complicated relationship which at present is not
completely understood. Some studies exploring the dimen—
sions of presbycusis have been presented in the past ten
years. These have tested several types of pOpulation,
mainly with pure tone audiometry.

The report of the 1954 Wisconsin State Fair Hearing
Survey supports the idea that there is a difference in test
results between the various ages of adults with pure tone
audiometry.3 Young adults were shown to yield better
thresholds than were a less select group of normal subjects
drawn from the population at large}L

J. F. Corso recently completed a ten year study on
adults eighteen to sixty—five. This group was carefully
screened to eliminate those individuals with excessive

noise exposure and physical illnesses or defects affecting

hearing. Results showed a decrease in hearing sensitivity

 

3Aram Glorig, "Some Medical Implications of the 1954
Wisconsin State Fair Hearing Survey,” American Academy of
Ophthamology and 0tolaryngology, 61 (1957), 160-171.

“James F. Jerger et_§1,, "Some Relations Between
Normal Hearing for Pure Tones and for Speech,” Journal
of Speech and Hearing Research, 2 (1959), 126-140.

with increasing age. The loss was progressive, spreading
from the higher to the lower frequencies.5

Aram Glorig and Hallowell Davis report similar
results after testing a group of men with no noise
exposure.6

These changes in hearing threshold occur concomi-
tantly with changes in the ability to discriminate speech.
However these two changes are not isomorphic. In older
individuals the discrimination of speech may be poor and
the hearing loss mild.7

Little research can be found concerning the effect
of aging on speech discrimination.

Age was not considered in the original testing of
the CID Auditory Test W-22. Ira J. Hirsh gt_al. presented
the results of testing normal hearing adults. At 80 db the
average score was 98%.8

In a study by McNamee, school children were given

the CID Auditory Test W—22 at 50<ib. Average scores ranged

 

5J. F. Corso, "Age and Sex Difference in Puretone
Thresholds,” A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 77 (April,

1963), 385.

 

6Aram Glorig and Hallowell Davis, ”Age, Noise and
Hearing Loss,” Annals of 0tologyL¥Rhinology, Laryngology,
70 (June, 1961), 556-571.

 

7G. Pestalozza and I. Shore, ”Clinical Evaluation
of Presbycusis on the Basis of Different Tests of Auditory
Function," Laryngoscope, 65, (1955), 1161.

 

8Ira J. Hirsh.§t-al,, ”Development of Materials for
Speech Audiometry," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,

17 (1952). 332.

 

from 70.5% in grade one upward to 87.66% in grade ten and
90.08% in young adults.9

In 1961 at Michigan State University, Nielsen tested
three, four, and five year old children with the CID
Auditory Test W-22. Scores were much lower than those
presented either by Hirsh or McNamee. Again there was a
rise in test scores as age increased.lO

Briefly, there is a hearing loss associated with
aging. Changes in Speech discrimination do not differ
systematically with changes in hearing threshold. Test
results of McNamee, Nielsen, and Hirsh differ. Age was
not a factor in the original testing of the CID Auditory
Test W—22. These statements would suggest several
questions:

(1) Does the mean number of correct responses of
adults to the CID Auditory Test W—22 vary from age to age?

(2) 0n the CID Auditory Test W—22 how do the results
.of adults of specific ages compare with the results of pre—
school and school aged children?

(3) What is the relationship among scores on the

CID Auditory Test W—22 as a function of age groups?

 

9Joan F. McNamee, ”An Investigation of the Use of
the CID Auditory Test W—22 with Children'' (unpublished
Master's dissertation, Department of Speech, Ohio State
University, 1960), pp. 28—29.

loKaren Nielsen, "Speech Sound Discrimination of
Pre—School Children as Measured by the CID Auditory Test
W-22” (unpublished Master's dissertation, Department of
Speech, Michigan State University, 1961), pp, 26-28.

Hypothesis

 

The following hypothesis is proposed:

There is no significant variation in the mean
number of correct responses to the CID Auditory
Test W-22 among any of the following age groups:
16-19, 20-24, 25—29, 30-34, 35—39, 40-44, 45-49.

Importance of Study

 

Speech hearing tests are an important means of
evaluating the use of the hearing function. They deter—
mine how satisfactorily one can receive communication
rather than just the ability of the ear to hear sounds of
varied intensity and pitch.

Many factors can influence the results of speech
hearing tests; DiCarlo suggests synthesis, analysis, dis-
crimination, concentration, cluster, memory, effort
fatigue, and language ability.ll In using a test where
so many variables may be present, it seems imperative to
learn as much about the variables as possible in order to
control or eliminate them when necessary.

In the original testing of the CID Auditory Test
W-22 the effect of age was not considered. The importance
of this study is the investigation of age as a factor in
speech discrimination testing. Knowledge of the effect

of age or the lack of effect of age on test scores on the

 

llWatson, op. cit., p. A38.

adult level will increase the information relative to the
usefulness of the CID Auditory Test W-22.

Since the CID Auditory Test W-22 is the basis for
compensation purposes, additional knowledge about the test
would be important.

Combining these findings with those of Nielsen and
McNamee Should result in a more complete evaluation of

the effects of age on the CID Auditory Test W—22.

Definition of Terms

 

The following are definitions of terms employed in
this study.

Presbycusis——The effects of age on hearing.

 

Speech Reception Tests-—Audiometric tests which

 

utilize Speech samples--syllab1es, words, phrases, or
sentences as stimuli. These include both speech threshold
and Speech discrimination tests.

Speech Discrimination Tests—-Those Speech reception

 

tests which measure a person's ability to distinguish
between similar sounds or words.

CID Auditory Test W—22-—A Speech discrimination test

 

develOped at the Central Institute of the Deaf, made up of
four lists each containing fifty different phonetically
balanced monosyllabic words.

Normal Hearing——If a person passes a pure tone sweep

 

check hearing test in each ear at frequencies of 250 cps,

500 cps, 1000 Cps, 2000 cps, 4000 cps, and 8000 ops at an
intensity of 15 db this person is viewed as having normal

hearing.

Organization of the Thesis

 

Chapter I has discussed the statement of the problem
with which this study is concerned. This has included an
introduction andeadiscussion of the purpose of the study.
The hypothesis has been stated. Terms used in the study
have been defined, and the organization of the thesis has
been given.

Chapter II presents a review of the literature con—
cerning speech reception tests. The development of the
CID Auditory Test W—22 is discussed. A review of studies
dealing with presbycusis is also presented.

Chapter III describes the testing including sub-
jects, equipment, and procedure.

Chapter IV presents the results, the statistical
analysis and discussion.

Chapter V includes the summary and conclusions of

the study.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The DevelOpment of Speech
Reception Tests

 

 

Although many of the Speech reception tests cur-
rently used are of recent origin, such testing began with
the invention of the Edison phonograph in the 1870's.
Some twenty years later the first Speech audiometer was
invented by Sohier-Bryant.l Bryant reports one of the

early tests in the A.M.A. Archives of 0tolaryngology pub—

 

lished in 1904.2

The telephone industry has played a major part in
the develOpment of speech reception tests. Dr. G.A.
Campbell was one of the first to prOpose the use of sounds
for testing Speech intelligibility over the telephone. In
early testing, words and sentences were chosen haphazardly.
Campbell used initial consonants combined with the 33

sound.3

 

lDouglas MacFarlan, ”Speech Hearing Tests,”
Laryngoscons. 55 (1945), 72.

2C.V. Hudgins et al., "The DevelOpment of Recorded
Auditory Tests for Measuring Hearing Loss for Speech,”
Laryngosc0pe, 57 (1947), 60.

 

3H. Fletcher and J.C. Steinberg, ”Articulation
Testing Methods,” Bell System Technical Journal (1929), 808.

 

In 1917 I.B. Crandall prepared word lists with both
simple and compound consonant forms. All common vowels
were used in the combinations and with the frequency of
written speech.4 This was one of the early attempts to
construct phonetically balanced word lists.

William A. Bristol used the electric phonograph
with a pickup that activated a telephonic circuit to test
(and instruct) deaf children. He presented a testing
list in 1926 composed of sixty-three words. These words
were often monosyllabic, usually common to children such
as ball, one, two, or Monday.5

Also in the 1920's the Western Electric 4-A Audi-
ometer was employed to test children. Test items were
recorded digits. This was a group screening procedure.6

Two of the pioneers in the develOpment of articu-
lation tests were H. Fletcher and J.C. Steinberg. The
tests they develOped were tools in the development of the
telephone and related communication systems.7 They pre—

pared a test that was published in 1929. This was com-

prised of consonant—vowe1—consonant syllables with the

 

“Ibid., pp. 808-811.
5MacFarlan, op. cit., p. 72.
6Hudgins, op. cit., p. 60.

7Watson, 0p. cit., p. 452.

lO

consonants and vowels and their positions in prOportions
found in spoken language. This test was based on the
revised scientific alphabet.8

Although the background for the measuring of
intelligibility lay in these tests of Fletcher some
thirty years ago they were not followed up by those in
the field of Speech. Fletcher was primarily concerned
with the phonetic element of speech and with the evalu—
ating of telephonic equipment.9

Shortly before and during World War II much was
accomplished at the Harvard Psycho Acoustic Lab in the
development of articulation tests. Stressed in these
tests of words and sentences were equivilance among
test forms and phonetic equation.

The urgent need for good communication via air-
plane inter-communication equipment, deSpite noises,
motivated researchers. But problems were multiple,
including varied speaking intelligibility of students
and the lack of availability of constant listening

groups. Since there was need for short tests, workers

 

8Fletcher, op. cit., p. 808.

9Hess Haagen "Intelligibility Measurement," Speech
Monographs, 1 (1946), 4.

 

ll

looked hopefully at new approaches to intelligibility
testing. These pressures led to a concentration of work
on word intelligibility.lo

To J.P. Egan goes credit for the original PB word
lists. The variables to which he gave primary concern

11 The PB

were phonetic content and word familiarity.
lists contain monosyllabic words. Each list has the
phonetic elements in frequencies of occurences corre-
sponding to their frequencies in spoken English.12

Currently, there are four types of materials used
in testing articulation. They are syllable lists, mono—
syllabic words, spondaic words, and sentences.13

In articulation intelligibility tests short
monosyllabic words are generally preferred. These tests
are of sufficient intensity so that loudness itself is
not a factor.14

Criterion for these tests in studies done in the

languages of England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Hebrew,

 

lOIbid., pp. 4—7.

llCharles Hutton and John Weaver, ”PB Intelligibility
and Word Familiarity,” Laryngoscope, 69 (1959), 1443-1450.

12Ira Hirsh, The Measurement of Hearing (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc., 1952), p. 130.

13James P. Egan ”Articulation Testing Methods,”
Laryngoscppe, 58 (1948), 962.

l“Watson, 0p. cit., p. 439.

12

Italy, France, Finland, and Portugal are: (l) monosyllabic
structure, (2) equal phonetic composition, (3) a represent-
ative distribution of sounds, (4) equal range and average
difficulty, and (5) words of common usage.15 The United
States now has an additional criterion. It is the intel—

ligibility of the Speaker.16

DevelOpment of the CID Auditory Test W-22

The twenty PB lists developed by Egan were modified
by Ira Hirsh and others at the Central Institute for the
Deaf. The resulting test is the CID Auditory Test W—22.
It consists of 200 monosyllabic words divided into four
50 word lists. Each list is phonetically balanced. There
are six scramblings of each list. The use of the test is
to determine the subject's discrimination loss for speech.
Hirsh defines discrimination loss as the difference
between 100% and the percentage of given speech material
the listener repeats correctly at a level sufficiently
high so that further increase in intensity will not in-
crease the number of correct answers.17

Criteria for the vocabulary used in this test

were: (1) one syllable words and no repetitions of

 

15Ferrer, op. ci§., pp. 1541—1542.

l61bid.

w

l7Hirsh, op. cit., p. 328.

13

words, (2) familiarity, and (3) phonetic composition
corresponding to that of English as a whole as much
as possible.18
The CID Auditory Test W—22 seems to have been very
carefully constructed. The authors of that test have
tested it extensively. Further testing, using untrained
listeners, has been carried out by John Corso. His test
results are in close agreement with those of the trained

19

listeners in the original testing. The CID Auditory

Test W—22 appears to be a test with real value.

Presbycusis

 

The old man with thelxnuivoice and ear trumpet of
past years has been modernized to the elderly gentle-
man with the concealed hearing aid. The awareness of
poorer hearing in the aged has long been present.
Understanding of this loss is still incomplete.

Credit for first describing the clinical manifesta—
tions of high tone deafness associated with aging is given

to a German Named Zwaardemaker, 1899.2O

 

18Ibid.

19John F. Corso, ”Confirmation of Normal Discrimina—
tion Loss for Speech on the CID Auditory Test W—22,”
Larynsoscope, 67 (1957). 365—370.

2OHarold F. Schuknecht, ”Presbycusis,”
scope, 65 (1955), 404.

Larynogo-

14

The first major study of the effects of age on
threshold of hearing was by C. C. Bunch. In 1929 he
reported pure tone test results of a group of hospital
patients. Above 512 cps there was a loss in average of
thresholds, in each successive decade. Averages for
thresholds of lower frequencies were fairly constant
regardless of age.21

Bunch did further research with his patients
suffering from arteriosclerosis, hypertension, cardiac
conditions and syphilis. He concluded that although this
loss in acuity in the high frequencies associated with
advanced age was a constant factor in these patients,
these diseases were not responsible for the loss.22

With each study more characteristics of this hearing
loss, presbycusis, were discovered. Different causes were
suggested; different phases studied. In 1939 Noble H.
Kelley reported his findings concerning auditory acuity
and age, presbycusis and the perception of music, and
presbycusis and the reception of speech. Concerning

speech he stated that in recognition of consonants, persons

over sixty were inferior at all intensities. In recognition

 

210. c. Bunch, ”Age Variation in Auditory Acuity,"
A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 9 (1929), 625-636.

22
C. C. Bunch, ”Further Observations of Age Varia-
tions in Auditory Acuity,” A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryn—

gologx, 13 (1931), 179-

15

of vowels, persons over sixty were not handicapped above
10 db above their thresholo.23

During and after World War II the period of great
advance for speech reception tests, very little was
accomplished in the study of presbycusis.

In the middle 1950's Pestalozza and Shore reported
that discrimination for speech was poor in the older
individual, even in those with a mild hearing loss.24
Joseph Sataloff and H. Menduke, testing a group of indi-
viduals sixty-four to ninety-three, found a low correlation
between age and hearing loss. There was little additional
hearing loss for pure tone after sixty-five.25

John Corso considered both age and sex differences
in pure-tone thresholds. He found, in agreement with
earlier research, a hearing loss in the aged, more marked
in the higher frequencies. He also reported a sex differ-

ence in hearing threshold, independent of age.26

 

23Noble H. Kelley, ”A Study in Presbycusis,” A.M.A.
Archives of Otolaryngology, 29 (1939), 513.

24G. Pestalozza and I. Shore, ”Clinical Evaluation
of Presbycusis on the Basis of Different Tests of Auditory
Function,” Laryngoscope, 65 (1955), 1161.

 

25Joseph Sataloff and H Menduke, ”Presbycusis,"
A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 66 (1957), 274.

26John F. Corso, ”Age and Sex Differences in Pure—
Tone Thresholds,” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 31 (April, 1959), 507.

 

16

With an increase in the life span of man, the total
field of geriatrics has become more important. Many
phases of the aging process are being studied extensively.
The study of one phase, presbycusis, is found with increas-
ing frequency in the literature.

In the 1960's, despite increasing knowledge, Glorig
claims that more needs to be known about this type of

hearing loss.27 0. P. Goetzinger pp 1. report that in so

far as is known there is no tentative normative data for
auditory discrimination at advanced ages. They explore the
effects of both age and sex on auditory sensitivity and
discrimination.28

The research of Robert Klotz and Marjorie Kilbane
again points to the limits of current knowledge. They
report a decline with age in the ability to hear and under-
stand speech with a discrimination loss greater than

29

expected.

 

27Aram Glorig and James Nixon, ”Distribution of
Hearing Loss in Various Populations,” Annals of Otology,
Rhinology and Laryngology, 69 (1960), 497.

280. P. Goetzinger 33 al., ”A Study of Hearing in
Advanced Age,” A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 73 (June,
1961) 662.

29Robert E. Klotz and Marjorie Kilbane, ”Hearing in
an Aging POpulation,” The New England Medical Journal,
266 (February 8, 1962), 277-280.

17

I. Kirikae §£_§l. report impairment in Speech dis—
crimination above the threshold in adults fifty to seventy
with normal thresholds.3O

Aram Glorig and James Nixon completed a study in
1962 with individuals above seventy. They have derived
a mathematical formula describing the progress of pres-
bycusis.31

Works by Corso, Glorig and Nixon, and Glorig and
Davis have considered noise exposure as a factor in
hearing loss.32’33’3u Glorig and Davis feel that those
unexposed to noise must be isolated in order to study
the effects of age. They conclude that the average age
effect, of itself, does not produce hearing impairment at
500 ops, 1000 cps, or 2000 CpS by age seventy. They feel

the threshold shift for speech should be only 10 db.35

 

3OI. Kirikae et al., ”A Study of Hearing in Advanced
Age," International'AHdiSlogy, 2 (Dec., 1963), 173-175.

31Aram Glorig and James Nixon, ”Hearing Loss as a
iFunction of Age,” Laryngosc0pe, 72 (1962), 1596—1610.

32John Corso, "Age and Sex Difference in Puretone
CPhresholds," A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 77 (April,
1963): 385.

33Aram Glorig and J. Nixon, "Distribution of
Ifeeudng Loss in Various Populations,” Annals of Otology
IRhinology and Laryngology, 69 (1960), 497-516.

34Aram Glorig and H. Davis, ”Age, Noise and Hearing
JLOSS," Transactions of the American Otological Society,

Stric. XLIX (1961), 262—277.

\ ’

35Ibid.

18

Currently there is disagreement both in the degree
of shift and in the anatomical causes of it. Ronald
Hinchcliffe states that Speech discrimination loss must
be due to retro-neural lesions, degenerative changes of
the brain.36 Glorig and Davis claim the age effect on
hearing is chiefly conductive, that it is the noise
induced hearing loss which is sensory-neural.37

Progress is being made; more is being learned;

and there is much yet to be learned about presbycusis.

 

36Ronald Hinchcliffe, ”The Anatomical Locus of
Presbycusis,” Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,

27 (November, 1962), 307-309.

37Glorig and Davis, op. cit., p. 276.

CHAPTER III

SUBJECTS, EQUIPMENT, AND TESTING PROCEDURE

Subjects
Eighty—four subjects participated in this study.

Six males and six females comprised each of the following
age groups: l6~l9, 20-24, 25—29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44,
and 45-49. Each subject had passed a pure tone sweep
check hearing test in each ear at frequencies of 250 CpS,
500 CpS, 1000 CpS, 2000 cps, 4000 cps, and 8000 cps at

an intensity of 15 db. None were familiar with the CID

Auditory Test W—22 and all were untrained listeners.

Equipment

 

A11 pre-test screening and all testing were done
on the Allison Audiometer, Model 20—A, manufactured by
Allison Labs, Puente, California. This audiometer is

in the Hearing Clinic, Michigan State University.

Materials

 

The records employed in testing the CID Auditory
Test W—22 were from Technisonic Studios, 1201 Brentwood
Blvd., St. Louis 17, Missouri. Word lists were l~C, 2-C,

3-C, A-c, 1—D, 2—D, 3-D, 4—D, l—F, 2—F, 3-F, and 4—F.

l9

2O

Prepared answer sheets were utilized by the sub—

jects for the recording of responses (See Appendix I,

page 45)-

Procedure

 

All testing was executed between 7:00 and 9:00
p.m. in the acoustically treated room in the hearing
clinic which is coupled to the control room. Subjects
were tested individually with no one other than the
subject and the tester present. Testing for each subject
was completed in one session. A pure tone sweep check
was given at 250 ops, 500 cps, lOOO Cps, 2000 cps, 4000
cps, and 8000 ops for each ear at an intensity of 15 db.
If the sweep check was passed at each and every frequency
for each ear the CID Auditory Test W-22 was given.
An identical explanation was given orally to each
subject directing him as to his part in the test:
This is a record of a man saying a list of words
which I want you to write down. He introduces
each word with the phrase, 'You will say.’ I
want you to write down the word he says to say.
For example, if he said 'You will say Dick,‘ you
would write Dick. All are one syllable words.
The CID Auditory Test W—22 was presented at 50 db
binaurally, using each of the twelve scramblings once in
each group. Output was measured and adjusted by the

voltage unit meter of the Allison Audiometer each time a

record was changed. Subjects recorded their responses

21

on prepared answer sheets which were checked and rechecked
using as a key the CID Auditory Test W-22 lists from

Measurement of Hearing1 with corrections (see Appendix II,

page 46).

 

lIra J. Hirsh, The Measurement of Hearing (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952).

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results
Test scores were tabulated with the results Shown
in Appendix III, page 45. Several statistical treatments
were used to determine variations between age groups and
between the different word lists.
The mean--most stable measure of central tendency--

was determined for each age group and for each word list

 

by the formula M = ZNX

where
M = the arithmetic mean
X = test score
N = number of scores

and 1E denotes ”sum of.”1 Means by age group are shown
in Figure 1. Means by word list are in Figure 2.

Because of an extreme score in the 30-34 age group,
word list 2-D, medians were also determined by the formula

5 - cum fi

Mdn=j+i 2 f

 

m

 

1Henry E. Garrett, Elementapy Statistics (New York:
Longmans, Green and Company, 1956) p. 29.

22

23

dsosc ow<
ms-ms sauce mm:mm smnom -mmnmm , smuom

malma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm-3 shoe ghosaosa oHo
one so mmzosu mw< mp noncoamwm pomssoo Cmozs:.H mudwam

 

 

O
f
M
-2

I z:

w:

1

I

m:

 

sueaw

24

song osoz

mu: m-m m-m mufi 6-: mum o-m -o-m o-m 6-6

 

 

: :: 2:.-.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmaz umoe zsopaos< QHO ogp so “mad @203 mp noncommom pomssoo smmZua.m omzwfim

25

where
l = lower limit of i upon which Mdn lies
N/2 = 1/2 of the total number of scores (N)
cum f1 = sum of scores on i's below 1
fm = frequency on the 1 containing the Mdn
i = length of interval.2 Medians by age group are

illustrated in Figure 3; medians by word list in Figure 4.

Standard Deviation from the Mean
for Each Age Group

 

 

When there is a variation, the mean is not descrip-
tive of the entire population. A measure of variability
is necessary. The standard deviation, most important
measure of variability, is calculated around the mean.
Because the standard deviation is determined by extracting
the square root of the variance its values are expressed
in units of the original scoring scale. It has the addi—
tional advantage of being mathematically manageable and is
often the basis of additional statistical treatment.3

The standard deviation from the mean for each age

group was found by utilizing the formula

k

0" =\/___éx2
N

 

2lbid., p. 37.

3Paul Blommers and E. F. Lindquist, Elementary
Statistical Methods (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company,
1960), pp. 139—141.

 

 

26

-as-ms -

ss-os-

mm-mm-

mdsosc ow¢
SMIOM

mm-mm , sm-om

mauma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-3 Shoe snobaos< oHo . sma
map so mmsosmmow<.zp noncommom poossoo smHUoZII m on .m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

r m:
1.3:
1_m:
1 w:
T.N:

v om

 

suetpew

27

ml:

span osoz

 

 

 

mum mum mid Qlfi, mum- ,QIN Qua

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

fill

 

 

 

 

 

 

NNIB umoa
SAODHUS< GHQ 63p :0 pmflq Usoz an noncommom powphoo

 

Tm:
:3:
ITEM

To:

suerpe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cwflooznu.: osswfim

INN—N

 

 

1m:

 

10:

[om

 

28

 

 

 

 

where

6 = standard deviation

:5 denotes "sums of"

X = deviation from the mean

N = number of scores.u Results are presented in
Table I.

TABLE I
STANDARD DEVIATION FOR AGE GROUPS

Age Mean Standard Deviation
16—19 46.75 2.314
20-24 47.50 1.849
25-29 47.25 1.534
30—34 47.00 3.240
35-39 47.67 1.748
Ao—AA 47.08 1.706
45-59 47-50 1.607

 

Standard Deviation from the Mean
for Each Word List

 

 

The standard deviation from the mean for each word
list was also found by utilizing the same formula. Results

are presented in Table II.

 

“Garrett, op. cit., p. 52.

29

TABLE II
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR WORD LISTS

 

 

Word List Mean Standard Deviation
l-C 48.29 1.749
2-0 47.14 .833
3-C 45.86 1.356
4-C 48.14 1.549
1—D 49.14 .640
2-D 44.29 2.910
3-D 45.57 1.676
4-D 48.57 .903
l-F 48.57 2.381
2-F 47.86 1.125
3-F 46.57 1.170
4-F 47.00 .756

 

Analysis of Variance

An analysis of variance, employing the method devel—
0ped by Fisher, was done to determine significant variations
among age groups.5 While this analysis does not show where

the variation may be, it does ascertain if there is

 

5J. P. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Psychology
and Education (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc.,

 

1942), pp. 145—151.

30

significant variance to warrant further inspection and

statistical treatment.

III.

The formulas are

and

when

The results are given in Table

 

 

2

between variance = n23?
2

within variance = 2'XS
k(n-l)

n = number of measurements in each set

d = deviation of set means from grand mean

k = number of sets

x = deviation within sets.

TABLE III

TOTAL VARIANCE SUBDIVIDED
INTO TWO COMPONENTS

 

 

 

 

Degrees Sums
Components of Freedom of Squares Variance
Between 6 7.7136 1.2856
Within 77 362.0836 4.7024
Totals 83 369.7972
= 1.2856 = 26
T7024 ° 5

According to Snedecor's table of points for the dis-

tribution of F, and F score of .265 with 6 and 77

31

degrees of freedom does not show significant variations
among age groups at the five per cent level of confi-

6

dence.

Comparison of Means with McNamee and Nielsen

 

Means of the age groups were compared with
means reported by McNamee7 and Nielsen.8 Results are

shown in Figure 5.

Discussion

 

Age Groups

 

There is little variation between means of scores
of the seven age groups. Difference between the highest
and lowest mean is .92. Age groups ranked from low to
high by means are 16-19, 30—34, 40-44, 25-29, 20-24 and
45-49, and 35-39. Although the lowest mean represents the
youngest age group, no further signs of continuity appear.

Age groups ranked from low to high by medians are
25-29, 40—44, 45-49, and 20—24, 16-19, 30-34 and 35-39
with 1.1 between the highest and lowest.

The greatest standard deviation, which is 3.240
in the 30-34 age group is 2.1 times as large as the
smallest which is 1.534 for ages 25-29. Standard devia—

tions ranked from smallest to largest are 25—29, 45-49

 

6Ibid.

7M0Namee, op. cit., p. 29.
aNielsen, 0p. cit., p. 26.

32

oomsw ow<

 

 

6n-Sn
WW"OW
62-98
hE-OS
63-98
na-oa
61-91

ram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mow<
somaofiz

 

 

 

 

 

 

wopwsc omEdZoE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

T ill]

_ ll

 

 

masosw ow< manawsm

mmuz pmoe Raoufioz¢ QHo.:omd30hu ow¢ wo mcmoz mo confihwdsooln.m ohswam

mm

rmm
Eli—NM
1mm

ism
Twm
ram
To:

 

sueem

33

40-44, 35—39, 20—24, 16-19 and 30-34. No relationship
between the amount of variation from means and age is

apparent.

Word Lists

 

There is greater variation between means of
scores on the twelve word lists, with 4.85 between the
lowest and highest. Three of the four word lists with
the smallest means are different scramblings of the
number three list (3—C, 3-D, and 3—F). Three of the
four word lists with the largest means are scramblings
of the number one list (l-C, l-D, and l—F). The
greatest difference between medians of scores is 4.38.
There is less indication of any pattern than with the
means. Standard deviations for word lists range from
.6395 to 2.910.

Analysis
The analysis of variance computed according to

the Fisher formulas shows none of these variations to

be significant at the five per cent level of confidence.

0n the basis of this, the hypothesis, which states that
there are no significant variations in the mean number
of correct responses to the CID Auditory Test W—22

among any of the following age groups: 16—19, 20-24,

25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, or 45—49, cannot be rejected.

Nor can any part of the hypothesis be rejected.

34

Since there is no significant variation among
age groups it would appear that age is not a factor in
Speech discrimination testing between the ages of
sixteen and fifty. These findings would support the
opinion of Glorig and Davis, that no allowance need be
made for the age effect when judging the hearing
impairment for which compensation is to be paid.9

10 and Nielsen11

Comparison with Studies by McNamee

When test results are compared with those of
McNamee and Nielsen an upward curve is indicated with
the mean number of correct responses of all adult groups
greater than those of any of the groups of children. In
both the pre—school and school age children scores
increased with age. This trend is not present in the
adult groups. Both McNamee and Nielsen report Signi-
ficant variations between some of the ages tested. No
significant variations are found between any of the age
groups from 16-19 to 45—49.

On the basis of these three studies, several

statements can be made: Adults score higher on the CID

 

9Aram Glorig and Hallowell Davis, "Age, Noise and
Hearing Loss,” Transactions of the American Otological
Society, Inc., XLIX (1961), 262—277.

lOMcNamee, op. cit.

llNielsen, op. cit.

35

Auditory Test W-22 than do children. Children's scores
on the CID Auditory Test W-22 tend to increase as a
function of age.

These statements raise many questions. Primarily,
what does the CID Auditory Test W-22 measure besides the
ability to descriminate speech? Vocabulary? The
ability to concentrate? Listening ability? Perhaps
young children do not have the neurological development
necessary to discriminate speech as well as do adults.
It would be interesting to compare the results obtained
by children and adults on a test using words more
familiar to children.

Children may simply lack in listening experience.
John Corso has reported that adults who are not trained
listeners, score as well on the CID Auditory Test W—22
as do adults who are experienced listeners.l2 It seems
doubtful that the same would be true of children.
Nielsen's training session prior to testing might ac—
count for her obtaining higher scores at the four and
five year level than those reported by McNamee in the
first and third grades. Adults may be trained listeners
by years of living experiences. It would be interesting
to test children after giving them formal listening

experiences.

 

'12John F. Corso, ”Confirmation of Normal Dis—
crimination Loss for Speech on CID Auditory Test W-22,”
Larymoscrone. 67 (1957). 369-370.

36

Both McNamee and Nielsen were given reSponses
orally. In the adult study reSponses were written.
This might influence scores.

More needs to be known about the incorrect re-
sponses of both children and adults. It has not been
reported whether subjects of all ages make the same
errors or the same kind of errors, whether certain
words are missed more frequently than others, or
whether there is a pattern to the position of errors.
In the study of adults, certain words were missed every
time while others were never missed. This may or may
not be true with children.

It seems that additional studies concerned with
these possible differences in adults and children
would be of value in understanding their varied abili-

ties as measured by the CID Auditory Test W—22.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUS IONS

Summary
Speech audiometry is often employed for the

assessment of hearing in conjunction with pure tone
testing. This results in a more valid estimate of an
individual's hearing than can be obtained by pure tone
audiometry alone. In this research, the CID Auditory
Test W-22 is utilized to study the effect of age on the
speech discrimination ability of adults.

The process of aging appears to affect hearing.
As an adult ages, thresholds for pure tone in the
higher frequencies increase. Concurrent with the pure
tone loss is a loss in the ability to discriminate
speech sounds. The changes in hearing threshold do not
differ systematically with changes in speech discrimina—
tion. There is not complete understanding of these
changes in hearing nor is there agreement as to causes.

A review of the literature reveals little re-
search concerned with the relationship between aging and
speech discrimination. The majority of studies have
been published in the past seven years. Most of these

have been research on the elderly. Little is presented

37

38

on adults below fifty. In the original testing of the
CID Auditory Test W-22 with adults, age was not
considered.

The subjects for this study were 84 adults,
twelve in each of the following age groups: 16-19,
20—24, 25-29, 30-34, 35—39, 40-44, and 45—49. All had
passed a pure tone screening at 15 decibels. Each
subject listened to one list of the CID Auditory Test
W-22 (1-0, 2—0, 3-0, 4—C, l—D, 2—D, 3—D, 4—D, l-F, 2-F,
3—F, or 4-F) presented at 50 decibels and recorded
reSponses on a prepared answer sheet. Tests were admin-
istered individually.

An analysis of variance indicates that there are
no significant variations among age groups at the five
per cent level of confidence. There is no systematic
change in means as age increases. Standard deviations
do not differ greatly as a function of age. Means for
scores by age groups are higher than all means presented
by both McNameel and Nielsen2 in their testing of

children.

Conclusions
0n the basis of the findings of this study the

following conclusions are made:

 

lMcNamee, op. cit., p. 29.
2Nielsen, op. cit., p, 26.

39

1. Within the ages of Sixteen years to fifty
years, scores on the CID Auditory Test W-22 do not vary
significantly as a function of age.

2. Every group of adults ages sixteen years to
fifty years performed better on the CID Auditory Test
W-22 than did any of the pre-school or school age

children tested by either McNamee3 or Nielsen.”

Implications for Further Research

 

In answering the questions set forth in this
study, many additional questions have arisen. The
following are some which might warrant further investi-
gation.

1. Will children with formal listening training
have higher scores on the CID Auditory Test W-22 than
children without training?

2. Will children with formal listening training
perform as well as adults on the CID Auditory Test W-22?

3. How do scores of adults above fifty years
compare with those of adults ages sixteen years to fifty
years on the CID Auditory Test W—22?

4. Are there variations between scores of
children and adults on a speech test comprised of words

common to a child's vocabulary?

 

3McNamee. 291.21:-
uNielsen, pp;_pip.

40

5. Do children make the same errors, or the same
kind of errors on the CID Auditory Test W-22 as do
adults?

6. On the CID Auditory Test W-22 are certain
words missed significantly more often than other words?

7. What is the relationship between adults'
scores on the CID Auditory Test W-22 and their scores on

other measures of sound discrimination?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Blommers, Paul, and Lindquist, E. F. Elementapy
Statistical Methods. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1960.

 

 

Garrett, Henry E. Elementary Statistics. New York:
Longmans, Green and Company, 1956.

 

Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology
and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company, Inc., 1942.

 

 

Hirsh, Ira J. The Measurement of Hearing. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952.

 

Watson, Leland A. and Tolan, Thomas. Hearipg Tests
and Hearing Instruments. Baltimore: The
Williams and Wilkins Company, 1949.

 

 

Periodicals

 

Bunch, c. 0. "Age Variation in Auditory Acuity,”
A. M. A. Archives of Otolaryngology, 9 (1929),
625—636.

. ”Further Observations of Age Variations
in Auditory Acuity,” A. M. A. Archives of Oto-
laryngology, 13 (1931), 170-180.

 

Corso, John. "Age and Sex Differences in Puretone
Thresholds," A. M. A. Archives of Otolaryngology,
77 (April, 1963): 385 ff-

. "Age and Sex Differences in Puretone Thresh-
olds,” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 31 (April, 1959), 498-505.

 

. "Confirmation of Normal Discrimination Loss
for Speech on CID Auditory Test W-22,‘l
Laryngoscoee, 67 (1957). 365-370.

41

42

Egan, James P. ”Articulation Testing Methods,"
LarEnSOSCOPe. 58 (1948), 955-991.

Ferrer, Oscar. "Speech Audiometry: A Discrimination
Test for Spanish Language,” Laryngoscope, 70
(1960), 1541-1551.

 

Fletcher, H., and Steinberg, J. c. ”Articulation
Testing Methods,” Bell System Technical Journal,

8 (1929), 806-854.

Glorig, Aram. "Some Medical Implications of the 1954
Wisconsin State Fair Hearing Survey," American
Academy of Ophthamolpgyand Otolaryngology, 61
(1957). 1664171.

 

 

Glorig, Aram, and Davis, Hallowell. ”Age, Noise and
Hearing Loss,” Annals of Otology, Rhinology,
and Laryngology, 70 (June, 1961), 556—571.

I]

 

 

”Age, Noise and Hearing Loss, Transactions
of the American Otological Society, Inc., XLIX
(1961), 262-277.

 

 

Glorig, Aram, and Nixon, James. ”Distribution of
Hearing Loss in Various Populations," Annals
of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, 69 (1960),
497-516.

"Hearing Loss as a Function of Age,”
Laryngosc0pe, 72 (1962), 1596-1610.

 

Goetzinger, c. P. et g1. ”A Study of Hearing in
Advanced Age—,—1T A.M.A. Archives of Otolaryngology,
73 (June, 1961), 662-673.

Haagan, Hess. ”Intelligibility Measurement,” Speech
Monograpps, 13 (1946), 4-7.

 

Hinchcliffe, Ronald. ”The Anatomical Locus of Presby-
cusis,” Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,
27 (November, 1962), 301-310.

 

Hirsh, Ira, pp_§1. "Developments of Materials for
Speech Audiometry,” Journal of Speech and Hearing

Disorders, 17 (1952) 321-337.

 

Hudgins, C. V., §§.§l, ”The Development of Recorded
Auditory Tests for Measuring Hearing Loss for
Speech,l Laryngoscope, 57 (1947), 57-89.

43

Hutton, Charles, and Weaver, John. ”PB Intelligibility
and Word Familiarity," Laryngoscope, 69 (1959),
1443-1450.

Jerger, James F., et a1. ”Some Relations Between Normal
Hearing for Pure Tones and for Speech," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Research, 2 (1959), 126-140.

Kelley, Noble. "A Study in Presbycusis,” A. M. A.
Archives of Otolaryngology, 29 (1939), 506-513.

Kirikae, I., et al. "A Study of Hearing in Advanced
Age,” International Audiology, 2 (December,

1963): 173-174-

Klotz, Robert, and Kilbane, Marjorie. "Hearing in An
Aging P0pu1ation,'I The New England Medical
Journal, 266 (February 8, 1962), 277-280.

MacFarlan, Douglas. ”Speech Hearing Tests,”
Lapyngoscope, 55 (1945), 71—116.

 

Pestalozza, G., and Shore I ”Clinical Evaluation of
Presbycusis on the Basis of Different Tests of
Auditory Function,” Laryngoscope, 65 (1955),
1136-1163.

Sataloff, Joseph, and Menduke, H. "Presbycusis,”
_A. M; A, Archives of Otolaryngology, 66 (1957),
27l-27E.

Schuknecht, Harold. ”Presbycusis,” Lapyngoscope,
65 (1955). 402-419.

Unpublished Material

 

McNamee, Joan F "An Investigation of the Use of the
CID Auditory Test w-22 with Children.” Un-
published Master's dissertation, Department of
Speech, Ohio State University, 1960.

Nielsen, Karen. ”Speech Sound Discrimination of
Pre-School Children as Measured by the CID
Auditory Test W-22.” Unpublished Master's
dissertation, Department of Speech, Michigan
State University, 1961.

 

APPENDICES

44

APPENDIX I

SAMPLE OF ANSWER SHEET

 

 

Age

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name Sex
Test No. Date
1. 26.
2. 27.
3. 28.
4. 29.
5. 30.
6. 31.
7. 32.
8. p 33.
9. , 34.
10. 35.
ll. 36.
12. 37.
13. 38.
14. 39.
15. 40.
16. p . 41.
17. 42.
18. 43.
19. 44.
20. 45.
21. 46.
22. 47.
23. 48.
24. ' 49.
25. 50.

 

45

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\OOOxlmm-Irwmr—J

\OCDNOKN 4?me

felt

bells

owl

jam

what

them

isle (aisle)
bathe
none
it

up
stove
an
not (knot)
skin

us

earn (urn)

(nun)

smart

well

jaw

off

cap

does

that

with

live (verb)
one won)
die dye
gave

chest

yore (your)
knee

ham

tare (tear)

APPENDIX II

CID AUDITORY TEST W-22

List l-C

l8. deaf

19. wet

20. as

21. or (oar)
22. there (their)
23. east

24. knees

25. carve

26. yard

27. thing

28. ran

29. law

30. high

31. chew

32. me

33. ace

34. see (sea)
List 2—C

18. new (knew)
19. cars

20. young

21. key

22. else

23. star

24. odd

25. way weigh)
26. bin been)
27. eat

28. ice

29. oak

30. send

31. tree

32. and

33. flat

34. hurt

46

35-
36.
37-
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

mew
him
day
ache
hunt
you
she
dad
true
could
give
low
poor
twins
wire
toe

(ewe)

move
rooms
then

ail (ale)
thin
pew
own
hit
dumb
air
too
Show
now
ill
ease
by (buy)

heir)
two,to)

KOODNO‘lUl-P‘UUIUl—J

\OCDwa-P‘UUMH

though
bill
may

. nest

do

use (yews)
tie

done (dun)
011

no (know)
ears

dull

ate (eight)
if

start

add (ad)
shove

wood (would)
bee (be)
they

dust

ought (aught)
Jump

leave

in (inn)

ear

than

bread (bred)
will

. darn

of

toy '
cook
shoe

APPENDIX II--Continued

47

 

List 3-C
18. are
19. he
20. raw
21. smooth
22. year
23. aim
24. have
25. say
26. three
27. hand
28. glove
29. pie
30. owes
31. wool
32. end
33. jar
34. farm
List 4-C
l8. hang
19. near
20. go
21. aid
22. net
23. clothes
24. where
25. am
26. chin
27. all (awl)
28. who
29. few
30. stiff
31. my
32. nuts
33. save
34. his

35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.

44:
45.
47:
48.

49.
50.

is
out
we
west
tan
on
king
when
camp
book
ten
knit
this
lie (lye)
chair
cute

tin

so (sew)
yet

art

can

why

eyes (ayes)
tea (tee)
men

arm

pale (pail)
our (hour)
through (thru)
dolls

yes

at

l. owl

2. wire

3. isle (aisle)
4. give

5- up

6. she

7. wet

8. ace

9. skin

10. day
11. east

12. law

13. thing

14. carve

l5. mew

16. earn (urn)
l7. chew

1. jaw

2. ease

3. that

4. die (dye)
5. new knew)
6. with

7. knee

8. then

9. cars
10. does
11. star
12. oak

l3. eat

14. way (weigh)
15. tree

16. and

17. move

48

APPENDIX II--Continued

 

List l-D

18. or (oar)
l9. hunt

20. an

21. true

22. none (nun)
23. poor

24. what

25. felt

26. toe

27. jam

28. low

29. bathe

30. dad

31. stove

32. ache

33. us

34. see (sea)
List 2-D

l8. tare (tear)
19. dumb

20. live (verb)
21. now

22. cap

23. smart

24. by (buy)
25. thin

26. chest

27. off

28. show

29. too (two,to)
30. hit

31. well

32. ail (ale)
33. ham

34. young

35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.

44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

as

high

knees

yard

ran

there (their)
you (ewe)
deaf

him

not (knot)
me

it

twins
bells
could
them

send

hurt

odd

bin (been)
ice
else
key
own
rooms
yore
pew
one
air
flat
ill
gave

(your)

won)
heir)

\OCDNONUT-D‘UJIUH

KOCDNmUlJl‘Wth—J

may
chair
tie
ears
king
ten
start
we
add (ad)
when
aim
pie

. hand

say

. wool

smooth
is

they

yes

leave

pale (pail)
bread (bred)
eyes (ayes)
toy

yet

near

save

clothes

few

all (awl)

my
so
am
tin

(sew)

49

APPENDIX II--Continued

List 3-D

l8. shove

19. tan

20. ate (eight)
21. camp

22. oil

23. this

24. do

25. though

26. cute

27. nest

28. knit

29. done (dun)
30. jar

31. dull

32. west

33. he

34. farm

List 4-D

18. shoe

19. can

20. darn

21. men

22. ear

23. through (thru)
24. ought (aught)
25. wood (would)
26. at

27. dust

28. our (hour)
29. in (inn)
30. tea (tee)
31. will

32. are

33. cook

34. his

35.
36.
37-

38.

39-

40.

41.

42.
43

44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

raw
owes
have

three
glove

year

. end

are
out
if
on

no (know)

book
use
lie
bill

go
stiff
where

chin
who
net
hang
aid
nuts
arm
why
than
of

Jump

dolls

yews)
lye)

bee (be)

\Dm'flmU‘l-PUUIDH

\OCID'flmmJl'UUMI-A

APPENDIX II--Continued

isle (aisle
ace

east

hunt

earn (urn)
what

jam

ache

him

bells

owl

twins

as

there (their)

. not (knot)

ran
high

knee

flat

tree

else

smart

ail (ale)
gave

by (buy)
ice

oak

air (heir)
then

die (dye)
jaw

bin (been)
rooms

live (verb)

50

List l-F

l8. stove

19. low

20. poor

21. an

22. mew

23. law

24. wet

25. give

26. it

27. could

28. yard

29. dad

30. us

31. you (ewe)
32. none (nun)
33. felt

34. carve
List 2-F

l8. send

l9. thin

20. off

21. hurt

22. dumb

23. yore (your)
24. star

25. that

26. ease

27. pew

28. does

29. Odd

30. tare (tear)
31. with

32. chest

33. now

34. young

35-
36.
37-
38.
39-
40.
41.
42.

44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

35-
36.
37-
38.
39-
40.
41.
42.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

up

wire

she

chew
thing
day

skin
true

or (oar)
bathe
toe
knees
see (sea)
me

deaf
them

eat

own

new (knew)
well

one (won)
cars

key

move

hit

show

cap

ham

way (weigh)
and

too (two,to)
ill

\OCDNIQU‘IJTUUIUI—J

51

APPENDIX II--Continued

west
start
farm
out
book
when
this
oil
lie (lye)
owes
glove
cute
three
chair
hand
knit
pie

our (hour)
art

darn

ought (aught)
stiff

am

go

. few

arm

yet

Jump

pale (pail)
yes

bee (be)
eyes (ayes)
than

save

 

List 3-F

18. ten

19. wool

20. camp

21. end

22. king

23. on

24. tan

25. we

26. ears

27. ate (eight)
28. jar

29. if

30. use (yews)

31. shove

32. do

33. are

34. may

List 4-F

l8. toy

19. my

20. chin

21. shoe

22. his

23. ear

24. tea (tee)
25. at

26. wood (would)
27. in (inn)
28. men

29. cook

30. tin

31. where

32. all (awl)
33. hang

34. near

35.
36.
37-
38.
39-
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

he
though
say
bill
year

. nest

raw

done (dun)
have

tie

aim

no (know)

can

will

through (thru)
dust

why

bread (bred)
dolls

they

leave

of

aid

nuts

clothes

who

so (sew)

net

can

will

through (thru)
dust

52

 

 

 

s: m: 0: om m: s: m: om m: w: s: w: m:um:
m: m: s: w: om m: m: m: om m: s: w: ::10:
m: A: w: om m: m: m: m: w: m: m: om mmumm
s: w: 0: om m: m: mm m: s: w: s: om :muom
m: m: s: om s: s: m: om m: m: s: s: mmumm
s: s: m: m: m: :: w: m: m: m: m: cm :wuom
w: w: w: m: m: m: m: m: m: m: s: m: mauma
m-: a-m m-m m-H o-: o-m n-m Q-H 6-: o-m cum o-H ow:
ence
memoow Emma

HHH XHszmm¢

ASN.1 use. can

fifths"
.~ 1:..7‘!”

'k.

i, lgt': 1 ‘ ,
A: s 4v; . 5 1’ .-
f ..,,3 'LJ {1 i: _ .‘If ‘
1" 3.

 

 

 

”ll? 1111111 1111fllfllfllfliflllllllfilES