中华耳科学杂志
中華耳科學雜誌
중화이과학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY
2014年
1期
112-115
,共4页
山西方言%晋语%言语测听%单音节%复测信度
山西方言%晉語%言語測聽%單音節%複測信度
산서방언%진어%언어측은%단음절%복측신도
Shanxi dialect%Jin dialect%speech audiometry%monosyllabic%retest reliability
目的：分析普通话言语测听单音节词表在山西方言人群中的测试结果与普通话组有无差异，并探讨本套单音节词表在山西方言人群中应用时的复测信度。方法选取山西省的5个方言区，每个区选取母语为方言的“耳科正常”受试者12名，在10dB HLSpe ch给声强度下依次测试22张词表，每位受试者词表测试顺序相同；10-20天后在与第一次相同的条件下进行重复测试，记录每张表的识别率得分。结果两独立样本t检验结果显示方言组总体测试得分与普通话组差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）；配对t检验示除并州片外其他几个方言区前后两次测听结果差异均有统计学意义；5个方言区总体初测得分65.0%±14.6%，复测得分67.2%±12.1%，临界差值15.9%，各个方言区临界差值12.9%-17.8%。结论本套单音节词表在山西方言组测试结果与普通话组有差异，方言区人群前后两次测试结果应超过该方言区的临界差值，才能认为所做听力学干预措施有效；学习效应对单音节表测听结果影响较大。
目的：分析普通話言語測聽單音節詞錶在山西方言人群中的測試結果與普通話組有無差異，併探討本套單音節詞錶在山西方言人群中應用時的複測信度。方法選取山西省的5箇方言區，每箇區選取母語為方言的“耳科正常”受試者12名，在10dB HLSpe ch給聲彊度下依次測試22張詞錶，每位受試者詞錶測試順序相同；10-20天後在與第一次相同的條件下進行重複測試，記錄每張錶的識彆率得分。結果兩獨立樣本t檢驗結果顯示方言組總體測試得分與普通話組差異有統計學意義（P<0.01）；配對t檢驗示除併州片外其他幾箇方言區前後兩次測聽結果差異均有統計學意義；5箇方言區總體初測得分65.0%±14.6%，複測得分67.2%±12.1%，臨界差值15.9%，各箇方言區臨界差值12.9%-17.8%。結論本套單音節詞錶在山西方言組測試結果與普通話組有差異，方言區人群前後兩次測試結果應超過該方言區的臨界差值，纔能認為所做聽力學榦預措施有效；學習效應對單音節錶測聽結果影響較大。
목적：분석보통화언어측은단음절사표재산서방언인군중적측시결과여보통화조유무차이，병탐토본투단음절사표재산서방언인군중응용시적복측신도。방법선취산서성적5개방언구，매개구선취모어위방언적“이과정상”수시자12명，재10dB HLSpe ch급성강도하의차측시22장사표，매위수시자사표측시순서상동；10-20천후재여제일차상동적조건하진행중복측시，기록매장표적식별솔득분。결과량독립양본t검험결과현시방언조총체측시득분여보통화조차이유통계학의의（P<0.01）；배대t검험시제병주편외기타궤개방언구전후량차측은결과차이균유통계학의의；5개방언구총체초측득분65.0%±14.6%，복측득분67.2%±12.1%，림계차치15.9%，각개방언구림계차치12.9%-17.8%。결론본투단음절사표재산서방언조측시결과여보통화조유차이，방언구인군전후량차측시결과응초과해방언구적림계차치，재능인위소주은역학간예조시유효；학습효응대단음절표측은결과영향교대。
Objective To analyze the difference between populations speaking Shanxi dialect and a mandarin speaking group in performance when tested by mandarin speech test materials,as well as the validity of this monosyllable list set when applied to populations speaking Shanxi dialect. Methods“Otologically normal”native dialect speaking subjects from 5 dialect zones in Shanxi province (12 from each zone) were selected. The 22 lists in the set were tested in each participant in the same order at 10 dB HL (Spe ch), and the rate of word recognition recorded. The test was repeated in each participant within 10-20 days. Results T-test showed that word recognition scores among the dialect groups and mandarin group were statistically significant (P<0.01). Paired t-test showed that the test-retest differences were statistically significant among all dialect areas, except of the Bingzhou dialect area. The initial test score was 65.0%± 14.6%, and the retest scores was 67.2%± 12.1%for the dialect groups, showing an overall critical difference of 15.9% and various critical differences of 12.9%-17.8% across the dialect groups. Conclusions Mandarin crowd test results of this set of monosyllabic lists cannot be directly applied to populations speaking Shanxi dialects. Only when dialect speaking population test-retest results difference exceeds the critical difference, can audiology intervention be considered effective. The learning effect can also influence the result of speech audiometry.
