Response Method in Audiometry Purpose This study compared the speed, false-alarm rate, and participant preference of different response methods (raising a hand, pushing a response button, and giving an oral response) for measuring pure-tone thresholds. Method Thirty female university students with normal hearing participated. Response method order was randomly assigned to 6 ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 2007
Response Method in Audiometry
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jennifer N. Repka
    Ohio University, Athens
  • Contact author: Jeffrey J. DiGiovanni, W222 Grover Center, School of Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701. E-mail: digiovan@ohio.edu.
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Research and Technology / Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 2007
Response Method in Audiometry
American Journal of Audiology, December 2007, Vol. 16, 145-148. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/018)
History: Received January 19, 2007 , Revised June 7, 2007 , Accepted July 13, 2007
 
American Journal of Audiology, December 2007, Vol. 16, 145-148. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/018)
History: Received January 19, 2007; Revised June 7, 2007; Accepted July 13, 2007

Purpose This study compared the speed, false-alarm rate, and participant preference of different response methods (raising a hand, pushing a response button, and giving an oral response) for measuring pure-tone thresholds.

Method Thirty female university students with normal hearing participated. Response method order was randomly assigned to 6 different groups. Air-conduction thresholds were measured twice for each response method for each participant in octave intervals between 250 Hz and 8000 Hz. The 2nd threshold measurements were performed on a different day but within 2 weeks of the initial measurement.

Results A significant difference was found when comparing the amount of time necessary to complete the test for each response method. On average, it took about 1 min less when using the push-button response than when using hand-raise or verbal response methods. There was also a significant participant preference for using the response button. No significant difference between response method for threshold level and number of false positives was found.

Conclusion This study supports the use of the response button when measuring auditory thresholds for young adults with normal hearing.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access