Validating the Malaysian Mandarin paediatric speech perception (MyMaPS) test: examining age sensitivity and test-retest reliability

被引:0
|
作者
Lim, Elizabeth Shu Jun [1 ]
Chong, Foong Yen [1 ,3 ]
Quar, Tian Kar [1 ]
Lim, Hui Woan [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kebangsaan Malaysia, Ctr Rehabil & Special Needs Studies iCaRehab, Fac Hlth Sci, Audiol Programme, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[2] Univ Kebangsaan Malaysia, Ctr Rehabil & Special Needs Studies iCaRehab, Fac Hlth Sci, Speech Sci Programme, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[3] Univ Kebangsaan Malaysia, Ctr Rehabil & Special Needs Studies iCaRehab, Fac Hlth Sci, Audiol Programme, Kuala Lumpur Campus,Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia
关键词
Children; Mandarin; age effects; test-retest reliability; speech perception; 1-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; PHONOLOGICAL ACQUISITION; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT; LEXICAL TONES; RECOGNITION; AUDIOMETRY; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1080/2050571X.2023.2234120
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
The Malaysian Mandarin Paediatric Speech Perception (MyMaPS) test was developed to assess Mandarin-speaking children in Malaysia, a multilingual country in Southeast Asia (Lim et al., 2021). However, the digitized materials have not been validated yet among Malaysian Mandarin-speaking children. Therefore, further examinations are needed to validate the MyMaPS test. The current cross-sectional study is an extension of the Lim et al. (2021) study. In the current study, we examined the age effects and test-retest reliability of the MyMaPS test among Mandarin-speaking children (N = 136) aged 3;4-6;5 years old. Participants were grouped into four age groups (3-, 4-, 5-, 6-year-old) with equal numbers and gender distribution. Participants were assessed using the MyMaPS test which contains five subcategories (Category 1-5): Speech pattern perception (C1), Spondee perception (C2), Vowel perception (C3), Consonant perception (C4), and Tone perception (C5). The Tone perception (C5) subcategory is further divided into six subtests according to the tonal contrasts. The MyMaPS test was repeated among 20% of the participants to examine test-retest reliability. This study found significant age effects (p < .05) for all subcategories (C1 - C5) in the MyMaPS test. Generally, the 5- to 6-year-old groups performed significantly better than the 3- and 4-year-old groups, particularly in consonant perception (C4) and tone perception (C5). Intraclass correlation coefficient values (.50 - .88) suggested moderate to good test-retest reliability. The results of this study suggested that the MyMaPS test could be a suitable and reliable test for evaluating the Mandarin speech perception ability among Malaysian Chinese-speaking children.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 129
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Test-retest reliability of girl's perception of environmental factors and transportation for physical activity
    Evenson, KR
    Birnbaum, AS
    Bedimo-Rung, AL
    Voorhees, CC
    Ring, K
    Sallis, JF
    Elder, J
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2004, 36 (05): : S329 - S329
  • [42] Examining 3-month test-retest reliability and reliable change using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery
    Karlsen, Rune H.
    Karr, Justin E.
    Saksvik, Simen B.
    Lundervold, Astri J.
    Hjemdal, Odin
    Olsen, Alexander
    Iverson, Grant L.
    Skandsen, Toril
    APPLIED NEUROPSYCHOLOGY-ADULT, 2022, 29 (02) : 146 - 154
  • [43] Face, Construct and Criterion Validity, and Test-Retest Reliability, of the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire
    Mishra, Mandira
    Allen, Mark S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2025, 41 (02) : 144 - 153
  • [44] Test-retest reliability of psychological scales (sensitivity and attitude) related to community reaction to noise
    Job, RFS
    Topple, A
    Carter, NL
    Peploe, P
    Taylor, R
    Morrel, S
    INTER-NOISE 96 - THE 1996 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON NOISE CONTROL ENGINEERING, 25TH ANNIVERSARY CONGRESS - LIVERPOOL, PROCEEDINGS, BOOKS 1-6: NOISE CONTROL - THE NEXT 25 YEARS, 1996, : 2413 - 2418
  • [45] Test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change of the dimensional anxiety scales for DSM-5
    Knappe, Susanne
    Klotsche, Jens
    Heyde, Franziska
    Hiob, Sarah
    Siegert, Jens
    Hoyer, Juergen
    Strobel, Anja
    LeBeau, Richard T.
    Craske, Michelle G.
    Wittchen, Hans-Ulrich
    Beesdo-Baum, Katja
    CNS SPECTRUMS, 2014, 19 (03) : 256 - 267
  • [46] Meditation Breath Attention Scores (MBAS): Test-Retest Reliability and Sensitivity to Repeated Practice
    Frewen, Paul A.
    Unholzer, Franziska
    Logie-Hagan, Kyle R. -J.
    MacKinley, Julia D.
    MINDFULNESS, 2014, 5 (02) : 161 - 169
  • [47] Examining the test-retest reliability of commonly used neuromuscular, morphological, and functional measures in aging adults
    Schaun, Gustavo Z.
    Raidl, Peter
    Andrade, Luana S.
    David, Gabriela B.
    Marins, Eduardo F.
    Hafele, Mariana S.
    Pinto, Stephanie S.
    Csapo, Robert
    Alberton, Cristine L.
    GEROSCIENCE, 2025,
  • [48] Test-Retest Reliability and Sensitivity of the Concept2 Dyno Dynamometer: Practical Applications
    Bampouras, Theodoros M.
    Marrin, Kelly
    Sankey, Sean P.
    Jones, Paul A.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2014, 28 (05) : 1381 - 1385
  • [49] Test-retest reliability of the Greek Speech-in-babble test (SinB) as a potential screening tool for auditory processing disorder
    Sofokleous, Valentinos
    Marmara, Maria
    Panagiotopoulos, Georgios K.
    Mouza, Stellina
    Tsofidou, Maria
    Sereti, Afroditi
    Grigoriadi, Ioanna
    Petridis, Eleftherios
    Sidiras, Christos
    Tsiourdas, Michael
    Iliadou, Vasiliki
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2020, 131
  • [50] Processing speed test vs. symbol digit modalities test: test-retest reliability, practice effects, sensitivity, and convergent validity
    Rao, S.
    Schindler, D.
    Mourany, L.
    Mamone, B.
    Reece, C.
    Losinski, G.
    Kemeny, D.
    Rudick, R.
    Alberts, J.
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL, 2015, 21 : 228 - 229