The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Test-retest reliability of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB): an investigation of two responses

Test-retest reliability of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB): an investigation of two responses
Test-retest reliability of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB): an investigation of two responses
The South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB) is a new battery of tests currently under development, designed for the assessment of cochlear implant (CI) users’ music perception in the clinic. The MTB consists of pitch discrimination, pitch identification and rhythm discrimination tests. This research project investigated the test-retest reliability of the SOECIC MTB and examined whether two different response methods influenced the test-retest reliability of the tests. Twenty normal hearing participants were recruited to complete the tests using both a three interval three alternative forced choice (3I3AFC) procedure and a three interval two alternative forced choice (3I2AFC) procedure. The test sessions were repeated on three separate occasions, in order to assess test-retest reliability. Eighteen of the twenty participants recruited completed all the test sessions and were included in the data analyses. It was hypothesised that the 3I2AFC procedure would produce more consistent results compared to the 3I3AFC procedure. This is because the presence of a reference tone (3I2AFC procedure) would assist the participant by providing a constant point by which to make a comparison. If the tests were reliable, then the participants’ scores would not change significantly when testing was repeated. A comparison of group means showed that scores did not statistically differ for the three test sessions for either response method, indicating that there was not an effect of time. Further statistical analyses showed moderate to strong correlations between the three test sessions when participants were using the 3I3AFC procedure. However, the correlations were weaker (some not statistically significant, p>0.05) between the test sessions when participants were using the 3I2AFC procedure. It was concluded that the SOECIC MTB demonstrated test-retest reliability when administered to a small sample of normal hearing listeners. The correlations between test sessions imply that the 3I3AFC procedure should be retained over the 3I2AFC procedure for future testing. It is proposed that further research should focus on investigating whether similar levels of test-retest reliability can be demonstrated when testing CI users.
Lamb, Rachel
d296e216-3b2d-40ab-a0b1-6e47077a8b8d
Lamb, Rachel
d296e216-3b2d-40ab-a0b1-6e47077a8b8d
van Besouw, R.M.
464435ed-eadc-4fcc-9d69-eb267d8fe81b

Lamb, Rachel (2010) Test-retest reliability of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB): an investigation of two responses. University of Southampton, Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, Masters Thesis, 73pp.

Record type: Thesis (Masters)

Abstract

The South of England Cochlear Implant Centre (SOECIC) Music Test Battery (MTB) is a new battery of tests currently under development, designed for the assessment of cochlear implant (CI) users’ music perception in the clinic. The MTB consists of pitch discrimination, pitch identification and rhythm discrimination tests. This research project investigated the test-retest reliability of the SOECIC MTB and examined whether two different response methods influenced the test-retest reliability of the tests. Twenty normal hearing participants were recruited to complete the tests using both a three interval three alternative forced choice (3I3AFC) procedure and a three interval two alternative forced choice (3I2AFC) procedure. The test sessions were repeated on three separate occasions, in order to assess test-retest reliability. Eighteen of the twenty participants recruited completed all the test sessions and were included in the data analyses. It was hypothesised that the 3I2AFC procedure would produce more consistent results compared to the 3I3AFC procedure. This is because the presence of a reference tone (3I2AFC procedure) would assist the participant by providing a constant point by which to make a comparison. If the tests were reliable, then the participants’ scores would not change significantly when testing was repeated. A comparison of group means showed that scores did not statistically differ for the three test sessions for either response method, indicating that there was not an effect of time. Further statistical analyses showed moderate to strong correlations between the three test sessions when participants were using the 3I3AFC procedure. However, the correlations were weaker (some not statistically significant, p>0.05) between the test sessions when participants were using the 3I2AFC procedure. It was concluded that the SOECIC MTB demonstrated test-retest reliability when administered to a small sample of normal hearing listeners. The correlations between test sessions imply that the 3I3AFC procedure should be retained over the 3I2AFC procedure for future testing. It is proposed that further research should focus on investigating whether similar levels of test-retest reliability can be demonstrated when testing CI users.

Text
P2706.pdf - Other
Download (903kB)

More information

Published date: 2010
Organisations: University of Southampton, Human Sciences Group

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 173337
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/173337
PURE UUID: 5c7c514c-f5e0-4a19-ae8e-e517545bffa9

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 03 Feb 2011 12:02
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 02:31

Export record

Contributors

Author: Rachel Lamb
Thesis advisor: R.M. van Besouw

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×