Link to the University of Pittsburgh Homepage
Link to the University Library System Homepage Link to the Contact Us Form

An Examination of the Effects of Mode of Access on the Computerized Revised Token Test

Heilman, Laura E. (2008) An Examination of the Effects of Mode of Access on the Computerized Revised Token Test. Master's Thesis, University of Pittsburgh. (Unpublished)

Primary Text

Download (343kB) | Preview


Background: The Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT) was recently developed to improve the reliability and accessibility of the Revised Token Test (RTT). The CRTT was standardized using a touchscreen monitor; however, for various reasons, clinicians may need to use a mouse for test administration. In general, research suggests that younger individuals who are familiar with computers are more accurate and prefer to use a mouse. However, this may not be the case for brain-damaged persons with physical limitations. Thus, comparable performance when different input devices are used cannot be assumed. Aims: The purpose was to investigate similarities and differences between participants' performance on subtest and overall scores obtained from touchscreen versus mouse on the CRTT. The study also examined the test-retest reliability of the CRTT when different input devices were used and user preference.Methods & Procedures: Forty young, healthy adults participated in this study. All participants were native English speakers, and had no history of a speech, language, or learning disability. Participants passed a language screening, the Story Retell Procedure (SRP) (McNeil, Doyle, Park, Fossett, & Brodsky, 2002). Each participant took the CRTT with both modes of access, a mouse and a touchscreen, with their non-dominant hand. One-half (20) of the participants were administered both versions of the CRTT a second time. Additionally, all participants answered a preference questionnaire.Outcomes & Results: The results revealed that touchscreen overall scores were significantly higher than mouse scores. There were also significant differences on six of the ten subtests. The test-retest reliability for both versions was equivalent and not significantly different. The results indicated a significant preference for the touchscreen.Conclusions: While the touchscreen access method produced significantly higher subtest and overall CRTT scores than the mouse access method, along with equivalent reliability performance in this young normal participant population, it is not clear that it should be used as the preferred access method. If successful algorithms for equating the previously established psychometric data and normative sample derived from the touchscreen access method can be generated, then there will be no need to re-standardize the test.


Social Networking:
Share |


Item Type: University of Pittsburgh ETD
Status: Unpublished
CreatorsEmailPitt UsernameORCID
Heilman, Laura
ETD Committee:
TitleMemberEmail AddressPitt UsernameORCID
Committee ChairMcNeil, Malcolm Rmcneil@pitt.eduMCNEIL
Committee MemberHill, Katharine Jkhill@pitt.eduKHILL
Committee MemberPratt, Sheila Rspratt@pitt.eduSPRATT
Date: 8 September 2008
Date Type: Completion
Defense Date: 18 July 2008
Approval Date: 8 September 2008
Submission Date: 22 July 2008
Access Restriction: No restriction; Release the ETD for access worldwide immediately.
Institution: University of Pittsburgh
Schools and Programs: School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences > Communication Science and Disorders
Degree: MS - Master of Science
Thesis Type: Master's Thesis
Refereed: Yes
Uncontrolled Keywords: aphasia; auditory processing disorder; computer access; computer language assessment; computer mouse access; computer touchscreen access; diagnostic test; input device preference; language test; linguistic processing disorder; mode of access
Other ID:, etd-07222008-151505
Date Deposited: 10 Nov 2011 19:52
Last Modified: 15 Nov 2016 13:46


Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item