Assessing the American Sign Language version of the Computerized Revised Token TestGoldberg, Emily (2015) Assessing the American Sign Language version of the Computerized Revised Token Test. Undergraduate Thesis, University of Pittsburgh. (Unpublished)
AbstractBackground: Hearing loss and deafness in childhood is a risk factor for delayed communication (e.g., speech, language, and literacy) development, and the impact is dependent on a number of factors (ex: age of onset, severity, etc.). In the United States a subset of the population with severe-profound hearing loss uses American Sign Language (ASL) as their primary mode of communication. An ASL version of the Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT) was developed and assessed for test-retest reliability. ASL performance was compared to English reading performance. Procedures: This study included 20 non-native non-proficient (Group A), 20 non-native proficient (Group B), and 10 Deaf native (Group C) ASL users. They completed both the ASL (CRTT-ASL) and English Reading Word-Fade (CRTT-R-wf) versions of the CRTT. Results: Pearson Product correlation coefficients were derived for Mean CRTT and Mean Efficiency Scores of two versions between sessions. For mean CRTT Scores for the CRTT-ASL Group C demonstrated correlations of .70 or above (r=.769). For the Mean Efficiency Scores, Groups B and C produced acceptable correlations (r=.78 and .75 respectively). Group C produced correlations between CRTT-ASL and CRTT-R-wf. All three groups demonstrated improvements on both tests between sessions (specifically Group A on CRTT-ASL). Performance on the CRTT-R-wf tended to be higher than on theCRTT-ASL, especially for Groups A and B. These effects were confirmed with a Mixed Model ANOVA along with a significant Group effect. Secondary analyses indicated that Group C differed on the CRTT-R-wf, but the groups were not different from each other on the CRTT-ASL for either session. Conclusions: Group C produced acceptable levels of test-retest reliability on CRTT-ASL, and Group B met criterion with Mean Efficiency Scores. All three groups produced acceptable correlations on CRTT-R-wf. Correlations between performance on CRTT-ASL and CRTT-R-wf were high for Group C. All groups increased in performance between sessions on both test versions, indicating a learning effect. Magnitude of change was pronounced for Group A on CRTT-ASL. The effect for Group was likely due to differences between Groups. The pattern of results may be attributed to the diverse language-learning experiences of Group C. Share
Details
MetricsMonthly Views for the past 3 yearsPlum AnalyticsActions (login required)
|
![[img]](http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png)
![[feed]](/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}