%PDF-1.2 %忏嫌 8 0 obj << /Length 9 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (1) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (1) Tj -202.08 558.24 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (CHAPTER 6) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -133.44 -22.56 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (S) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0375 Tc (cree) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.2 Tc (n) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0733 Tc -0.0267 Tw (ing for ) Tj 29.28 0 TD 0.0054 Tc 0.0546 Tw (\(Central\) Auditory Processing Disorder) Tj 157.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -187.2 -23.04 TD 0.05 Tc 0 Tw (R) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.0017 Tc -0.0983 Tw (onald L) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0067 Tc 0.1333 Tw (. Schow ) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.1467 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (J) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.46 Tc -0.08 Tw ( A) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.01 Tc 0 Tw (nthony) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.0067 Tc 0.3867 Tw ( Seikel) Tj 27.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -260.16 -23.04 TD -0.035 Tc 0.415 Tw (As ) Tj 13.44 0 TD -0.0867 Tc 0.2267 Tw (will be ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0 Tc -0.0994 Tw (discussed in Chapter ) Tj 84.96 0 TD -0.15 Tc 0 Tw (7,) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.1112 Tw ( a thorough assessment include) Tj 124.8 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0095 Tc 0.0055 Tw ( a battery of behavioral ) Tj -264.48 -23.04 TD 0 Tc -0.0318 Tw (and physiological tests, often spanning multiple testing sessions) Tj 255.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.024 Tc 0.036 Tw (The intensity and ) Tj -263.04 -23.04 TD 0.009 Tc -0.109 Tw (complexity of the diagnostic process mandate) Tj 182.88 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0145 Tc 0.1065 Tw ( the need for a ) Tj 59.52 0 TD 0.0089 Tc 0 Tw (screening) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.0214 Tc -0.1214 Tw ( instrument that ) Tj -284.64 -23.04 TD -0.0084 Tc -0.0116 Tw (will indicate individuals at risk for ) Tj 140.64 0 TD -0.0189 Tc 0.0389 Tw (\(central\) auditory processing disorder ) Tj 152.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD ([) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (]) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.1067 Tc (APD) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.048 Tc -0.292 Tw ( prior ) Tj -333.12 -23.04 TD 0.0076 Tc -0.1076 Tw (to initiation of assessment.) Tj 106.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0179 Tc 0.2379 Tw (The screening process ) Tj 91.2 0 TD 0.0975 Tc 0 Tw (prop) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.0025 Tc -0.0975 Tw (osed here) Tj 37.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.015 Tc 0 Tw (uses) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc 0.1393 Tw (behavioral tests ) Tj 64.8 0 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.0533 Tw (for ) Tj -346.56 -23.04 TD 0.0494 Tc -0.1494 Tw (referral purposes) Tj 67.68 0 TD -0.012 Tc -0.088 Tw ( for diagnostic testing) Tj 86.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0253 Tc 0.0053 Tw (The tests reviewed as potential screening ) Tj -159.84 -22.56 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (measures do not comprise an exhaustive list. ) Tj 181.44 0 TD -0.0207 Tc 0.0807 Tw (All the measures ) Tj 69.12 0 TD 0.0122 Tc 0.3678 Tw (reviewed h) Tj 44.16 0 TD 0.0514 Tc -0.1514 Tw (ave been ) Tj -294.72 -23.52 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.0283 Tw (selected because they represent three primary auditory ) Tj 219.84 0 TD 0.0207 Tc -0.1207 Tw (processing domains reflected in ) Tj -219.84 -22.56 TD 0.004 Tc -0.067 Tw (recent conference and work group reports \(ASHA, 2005; Jerger & Musiek, 2000\) and ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.01 Tc 0 Tw (al) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0575 Tc -0.1575 Tw (most ) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.0267 Tc -0.1267 Tw (all ) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.0042 Tc 0.0025 Tw (the tests have been examined in at least one ) Tj 176.64 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (factor analysis ) Tj 60.48 0 TD 0.0322 Tc -0.1322 Tw (study that ) Tj -278.88 -22.56 TD 0.0123 Tc -0.1123 Tw (demonstrated its loading) Tj 97.92 0 TD 0.0131 Tc -0.0445 Tw ( on one of these domains. Other pote) Tj 147.36 0 TD 0.0218 Tc 0.0382 Tw (ntially useful screening ) Tj -245.28 -23.04 TD -0.0313 Tc 0 Tw (measures) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0064 Tc 0.0024 Tw (that have not been involved in a factor analysis \(e.g., Gaps) Tj 233.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.565 Tc (In) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0021 Tc -0.2621 Tw (Noise; Musiek et ) Tj -288.48 -23.04 TD 0.05 Tc -0.15 Tw (al., 2005\)) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (have been omitted. ) Tj 78.24 0 TD -0.0012 Tc -0.0455 Tw (This chapter reflects upon the costs and benefits associated ) Tj -119.04 -23.04 TD -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw (with ) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.0622 Tc 0 Tw (screening) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.0081 Tc -0.1081 Tw (, examines available screening tools) Tj 144.48 0 TD -0.0014 Tc -0.0986 Tw (, and makes recommendations based ) Tj -203.04 -23.04 TD 0.0085 Tc -0.1085 Tw (on the currently accepted theoretical model of \(C\)APD) Tj 219.84 0 TD -0.0275 Tc 0.1195 Tw ( and recent recommendations from ) Tj -219.84 -23.04 TD -0.0203 Tc 0.0574 Tw (the Bruton Conference and ASHA \(Jerger & Musiek) Tj 210.24 0 TD 0.3 Tc -0.4 Tw (, 2000) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (; ASHA, 2005\)) Tj 60 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -301.44 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0567 Tc -0.0433 Tw (The following) Tj 56.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (material ) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.0329 Tc 0 Tw (address) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.085 Tc (es) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.0124 Tc -0.0876 Tw ( audiologic/speech) Tj 74.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0125 Tc -0.0875 Tw (language ) Tj 38.4 0 TD -0.0167 Tc 0 Tw (screen) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.0067 Tc 0.1333 Tw (ing for ) Tj -304.8 -23.04 TD 0.0035 Tc -0.0599 Tw (\(C\)APD, and accordingly is jointly written by an audiologist and a speech) Tj 296.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0125 Tc -0.0875 Tw (language ) Tj -299.04 -22.56 TD 0.0075 Tc 0 Tw (pathologist.) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.125 Tc 0.025 Tw ( This ) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (material ) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (represents a new) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0074 Tc -0.0126 Tw ( experimental hybrid screening approach that ) Tj -174.24 -23.52 TD -0.0044 Tc -0.0156 Tw (we believe holds promise for clinical use.) Tj 166.08 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.1086 Tc 0 Tw (Because) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0.0309 Tc -0.1309 Tw ( \(C\)APD assessment should) Tj 111.84 0 TD 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw ( be within ) Tj ET endstream endobj 9 0 obj 6778 endobj 4 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 8 0 R >> endobj 11 0 obj << /Length 12 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (2) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.0074 Tc -0.0474 Tw (the context of a team of professionals \(e.g., audiologist,) Tj 222.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.025 Tc 0 Tw (speech) Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (language pathologist) Tj 83.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -340.8 -22.56 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (educat) Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.395 Tc (or) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.0123 Tc -0.0643 Tw (, psychologist, medical professional, parent, etc.\), we assume that other ) Tj -34.56 -23.04 TD -0.0036 Tc -0.0091 Tw (professionals may have their own screening processes and that, at some poin) Tj 306.24 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.032 Tc -0.132 Tw ( in the ) Tj -309.12 -23.04 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (assessment ) Tj 47.04 0 TD 0.0357 Tc 0 Tw (process) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.0133 Tc 0.0067 Tw (, this group of professionals would meet to ) Tj 173.76 0 TD 0.0557 Tc 0.3243 Tw (discuss ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.0733 Tc 0.4533 Tw (the ) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0.0131 Tc -0.1131 Tw (audiologist\222s ) Tj -296.64 -23.04 TD 0.0156 Tc 0 Tw (diagnosis) Tj 37.92 0 TD -0.0533 Tc -0.0467 Tw ( of \(C\)APD,) Tj 48.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0733 Tc -0.0267 Tw (the ) Tj 14.88 0 TD -0.0309 Tc 0.1709 Tw (need for furt) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.0223 Tc -0.1223 Tw (her evaluation) Tj 56.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1467 Tc -0.0067 Tw ( and ) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0.09 Tw (the plan for ) Tj 48.48 0 TD 0.0525 Tc 0 Tw (intervention) Tj 48.48 0 TD 0.38 Tc (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (As ) Tj -335.04 -23.04 TD -0.0137 Tc 0.0097 Tw (part of the screening process, w) Tj 126.24 0 TD 0.0316 Tc -0.1316 Tw (e discuss questionnaires that draw in) Tj 146.4 0 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (fo) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.0129 Tc (rmation) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.06 Tc -0.04 Tw (from ) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.018 Tc -0.598 Tw (other ) Tj -336.48 -23.04 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.0377 Tw (key players, and we assume that the audiologist) Tj 190.56 0 TD -0.0183 Tc -0.0817 Tw ( and/or) Tj 27.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.105 Tc 0 Tw (speech) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0553 Tc -0.1553 Tw (language pathologist ) Tj -251.04 -23.04 TD 0.0017 Tc 0.0903 Tw (involved in the screening process ) Tj 135.84 0 TD -0.0128 Tc 0.1048 Tw (might use these questionnaires to ) Tj 134.88 0 TD 0.0159 Tc -0.1159 Tw (gather information ) Tj -270.72 -23.04 TD 0.0083 Tc -0.1083 Tw (from psychologists, medical professionals, parents, teachers, and t) Tj 264.48 0 TD 0.0164 Tc -0.2764 Tw (he individual of ) Tj -264.48 -22.56 TD -0.0643 Tc -0.0357 Tw (concern ) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0.0206 Tc -0.1206 Tw (about potential comorbidities, such as ) Tj 154.08 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (ttention ) Tj 33.12 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (eficit ) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (h) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0208 Tc -0.0792 Tw (yperactivity ) Tj 49.92 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (isorder ) Tj -313.44 -23.52 TD -0.0857 Tc -0.0143 Tw (\(ADHD\), ) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1043 Tc 0.2757 Tw (earning ) Tj 33.12 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (isability \(LD\), ) Tj 60 0 TD -0.1014 Tc 0 Tw (reading) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.0352 Tc -0.1352 Tw ( problems, autistic spectrum disorder) Tj 147.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj -323.04 -22.56 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.11 Tc (peech/) Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.1 Tc (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (anguage deficit \(S) Tj 72.48 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (/) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.425 Tc (LD) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.155 Tc 0.225 Tw (as ) Tj 11.04 0 TD -0.2333 Tc 0 Tw (the) Tj 12 0 TD -0.0318 Tc 0.4118 Tw (se disorders ) Tj 50.4 0 TD 0.018 Tc -0.118 Tw (relate to behavio) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.0067 Tc 0.1467 Tw (rs suggesting ) Tj 54.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -322.08 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (\(C) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.02 Tc (A) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.39 Tc (PD) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0081 Tc -0.0738 Tw ( This information becomes especially important if the child goes on to a full ) Tj -35.52 -22.56 TD -0.0141 Tc -0.0859 Tw (diagnostic workup.) Tj 76.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.38 Tw ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -56.16 -23.04 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (S) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0074 Tc 0.0674 Tw (creening for children ) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0525 Tc -0.1525 Tw (or adults) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0 Tc -0.0993 Tw ( at risk for \(C\)APD) Tj 77.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (should ) Tj 29.28 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0.4 Tw (be completed) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.068 Tc -0.168 Tw (by the ) Tj -327.84 -23.04 TD 0.0089 Tc -0.1089 Tw (audiologist or speech) Tj 84.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0047 Tc 0.3753 Tw (language pathologist) Tj 83.52 0 TD -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw ( in a mann) Tj 41.28 0 TD 0.0547 Tc -0.1547 Tw (er similar to pure) Tj 69.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0347 Tc -0.1347 Tw (tone screening in ) Tj -284.64 -23.04 TD -0.0125 Tc -0.0875 Tw (the school setting) Tj 69.6 0 TD 0.0027 Tc 0.0173 Tw ( \(probably at the 3) Tj 73.44 0 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (rd) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.0127 Tc 0.1273 Tw ( grade level\)) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (, or, alternat) Tj 48.48 0 TD 0.19 Tc 0 Tw (iv) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.0267 Tc 0.0467 Tw (ely, may be completed ) Tj -257.76 -23.04 TD -0.011 Tc 0.0481 Tw (following referral by teacher, parent, or other ) Tj 183.36 0 TD 0.0067 Tc 0 Tw (professional) Tj 48.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0173 Tc 0.0027 Tw (Clearly, a screening protocol ) Tj -237.12 -23.04 TD -0.039 Tc 0.059 Tw (is important in helping ) Tj 92.64 0 TD 0.19 Tc 0.19 Tw (to ) Tj 11.04 0 TD -0.0267 Tc -0.0733 Tw (minimize t) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0.0138 Tc -0.1138 Tw (he attendant problems for the individual with ) Tj -146.4 -23.04 TD -0.0177 Tc 0.0549 Tw (\(C\)APD, for parents, educators, and other involved professionals) Tj 260.16 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (. Screening is important ) Tj -260.16 -23.04 TD -0.0018 Tc -0.0448 Tw (to allow timely intervention which should minimize distress and ) Tj 259.68 0 TD -0.07 Tc 0 Tw (maximize) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -299.04 -22.56 TD -0.0136 Tc -0.0864 Tw (communicative, educational) Tj 112.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0035 Tc 0.0635 Tw ( and social function) Tj 78.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0354 Tc -0.3754 Tw (Chermak, 1996; ) Tj 67.2 0 TD 0.005 Tc -0.105 Tw (Musiek, Gollegly, ) Tj -266.4 -23.52 TD -0.0431 Tc 0.1031 Tw (Lamb & Lamb, 1990\).) Tj 90.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 12 0 obj 7421 endobj 10 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 11 0 R >> endobj 16 0 obj << /Length 17 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (3) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.04 Tc (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (1) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.025 Tc -0.075 Tw (Costs and Benefits) Tj 74.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -95.04 -22.56 TD 0.009 Tc -0.0404 Tw (Any discussion about the ability of a test to perform its function must be ) Tj 291.84 0 TD 0.05 Tc -0.15 Tw (based on ) Tj 37.92 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.2933 Tw (the ) Tj -329.76 -23.04 TD 0.085 Tc 0 Tw (know) Tj 22.08 0 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (ledge that there is no) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.235 Tc 0.145 Tw (gold ) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.055 Tc 0 Tw (standard) Tj 36 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.093 Tc -0.007 Tw (behavioral ) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.0259 Tc -0.1259 Tw (assessment instrument, so this ) Tj -210.72 -23.04 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (necess) Tj 25.92 0 TD -0.0085 Tc 0.1085 Tw (arily reduces the certainty with which sensitivity and specificity can be identified. ) Tj 329.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -355.68 -23.04 TD 0.0074 Tc -0.0674 Tw (Ultimately, the sensitivity and specificity of central auditory tests should be \223derived ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0089 Tc -0.0555 Tw (from patients with known, anatomically confirmed central auditory dysfunction an) Tj 330.24 0 TD 0.038 Tc -0.138 Tw (d used ) Tj -330.24 -23.04 TD 0.0099 Tc -0.0139 Tw (as a guide to identify the presence of central auditory dysfunction in children and adults ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0182 Tc -0.0382 Tw (suspected of \(C\)APD\224 \(ASHA, 2005, p. 9\)) Tj 171.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.1288 Tc 0.3488 Tw ( The above ) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (philosophical ) Tj 56.64 0 TD -0.0467 Tc 0.1067 Tw (approach has been ) Tj -279.84 -23.04 TD 0.014 Tc -0.114 Tw (fundamental to the screening process recommended in this chapter in that f) Tj 300 0 TD -0.0017 Tc -0.0983 Tw (rom the ) Tj -300 -22.56 TD -0.005 Tc 0.001 Tw (beginning of our work we ha) Tj 115.68 0 TD -0.035 Tc 0.415 Tw (ve followed) Tj 47.52 0 TD -0.0081 Tc 0.0281 Tw ( the recommendations of Musiek) Tj 131.52 0 TD 0.074 Tc -0.174 Tw ( and Chermak) Tj 56.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -350.88 -23.52 TD 0.1167 Tc 0 Tw (\(1994\)) Tj 26.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0047 Tc -0.008 Tw ( which were based on anatomically confirmed central auditory dysfunction. ) Tj 307.2 0 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (T) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.205 Tc (able) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -359.04 -22.56 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0291 Tc -0.1291 Tw (1 illustrate) Tj 42.72 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0215 Tc -0.1215 Tw ( issues related to sensitivity and specificity) Tj 170.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0471 Tc 0.2671 Tw (\(Dawson & Trapp, ) Tj 77.76 0 TD 0.052 Tc -0.632 Tw (2004; ) Tj -305.76 -23.52 TD 0.0221 Tc -0.0261 Tw (Ingelfinger, Mosteller, Thibodeau & Ware, 1987\)) Tj 198.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -76.8 -22.56 TD -0.0917 Tc 0.2317 Tw (Insert Table 6) Tj 55.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.027 Tc -0.073 Tw (1 about here) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -54.24 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj -180 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.1136 Tc 0 Tw (Sensitivity) Tj 43.68 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0122 Tc -0.0557 Tw ( is the ability of a test to identify the presence of a disorder when one is ) Tj -73.92 -23.04 TD -0.0575 Tc -0.5225 Tw (actually ) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.0021 Tc -0.0106 Tw (present. Note that this ability has no implicit relationship to misident) Tj 276.96 0 TD 0.0545 Tc 0.0855 Tw (ifying those ) Tj -311.04 -23.04 TD 0.0046 Tc -0.0446 Tw (who do not have the disorder. Thus, the perfectly sensitive test of \(C\)APD will never ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0235 Tc -0.0435 Tw (miss in diagnosing someone with \(C\)APD \() Tj 174.72 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 3.36 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0133 Tc 0.3933 Tw (rue ) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0281 Tc -0.1281 Tw (ositive identification) Tj 86.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0167 Tc -0.1167 Tw (\), but does not ) Tj -286.56 -23.04 TD 0.0103 Tc -0.1103 Tw (\223care\224 about whether it is inadvertently misdiagnosing someone who does ) Tj 299.04 0 TD 0.028 Tc -0.128 Tw (not have the ) Tj -299.04 -23.04 TD -0.0111 Tc -0.0889 Tw (disorder \() Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (f) Tj 3.36 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0525 Tc 0.3275 Tw (alse ) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0281 Tc -0.1281 Tw (ositive identification) Tj 86.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.0027 Tc -0.0427 Tw (That is, sensitivity is only related to positive ) Tj -163.2 -22.56 TD 0.0625 Tc -0.1625 Tw (outcome. ) Tj 42.24 0 TD 0.0118 Tc -0.0478 Tw (By virtue of its highly sensitive nature, a test with high sensitivity will have a ) Tj ET endstream endobj 17 0 obj 5330 endobj 13 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 16 0 R >> endobj 21 0 obj << /Length 22 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (4) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.0159 Tc -0.0626 Tw (low false negative rate, where false negative is the group) Tj 227.04 0 TD 0.0031 Tc -0.0345 Tw ( of people who have the disorder ) Tj -227.04 -22.56 TD -0.0077 Tc -0.0123 Tw (but are not identified by the test as having the disorder. ) Tj 224.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -224.64 -23.04 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.006 Tc -0.0526 Tw (High sensitivity is a laudable goal in all cases, but comes at a cost. If one looks ) Tj -30.24 -23.04 TD 0.0054 Tc -0.1054 Tw (simply at economic outcome, ) Tj 120 0 TD -0.0098 Tc 0.0698 Tw (overidentification of a disorder results in deli) Tj 180.96 0 TD -0.0983 Tc -0.0017 Tw (vering ) Tj -300.96 -23.04 TD 0.0101 Tc -0.0819 Tw (services not only to those with the disorder but also to those for whom the services are ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.004 Tc -0.0671 Tw (unneeded. High sensitivity without regard for false positives is expensive in economic ) Tj T* -0.0443 Tc 0.1843 Tw (and human terms.) Tj 71.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0032 Tc 0.0632 Tw (However, high sensitivity is) Tj 112.8 0 TD 0.011 Tc -0.111 Tw ( good even if specificity ) Tj 98.88 0 TD 0.0027 Tc 0.0573 Tw (suffers a bit ) Tj -287.52 -23.04 TD -0.0078 Tc -0.0922 Tw (because if one uses a d) Tj 90.72 0 TD 0.0868 Tc -0.1868 Tw (iagnostic test follow) Tj 82.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1613 Tc 0.0613 Tw (up, the fa) Tj 36.48 0 TD -0.0055 Tc 0.3855 Tw (lse positive) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.17 Tc 0.07 Tw ( will) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.0062 Tc -0.0938 Tw ( be detected and ) Tj -280.32 -23.04 TD -0.0083 Tc -0.0917 Tw (not passed on.) Tj 56.64 0 TD /F0 8.4 Tf 0 Tc -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj -56.64 -22.56 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.1127 Tc 0 Tw (Specificity) Tj 43.68 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0605 Tc -0.1005 Tw ( is the ability of a test to ) Tj 99.36 0 TD -0.0018 Tc 0.0618 Tw (identify correctly those individuals who do ) Tj -173.28 -23.52 TD -0.0218 Tc 0.0818 Tw (not have the dysfunction.) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0105 Tc -0.1105 Tw (In this case, the test wit) Tj 93.6 0 TD 0.0059 Tc -0.0373 Tw (h perfect specificity will have no cases ) Tj -197.28 -22.56 TD 0.032 Tc 0.108 Tw (in the ) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (Fa) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.0233 Tc -0.0767 Tw (lse ) Tj 13.44 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (P) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0071 Tc -0.0701 Tw (ositive cell, because no one has been identified who does not have the ) Tj -54.24 -23.52 TD -0.0163 Tc 0 Tw (disorder) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0157 Tc -0.0471 Tw (The cost of this quality is that, because of the test\222s cautionary approach to ) Tj -37.44 -22.56 TD 0.0239 Tc -0.1239 Tw (misidentification, the number of true pos) Tj 163.2 0 TD -0.0044 Tc 0.0111 Tw (itives declines. A test with high specificity is ) Tj -163.2 -23.04 TD 0.0044 Tc -0.0358 Tw (conservative about identifying a disorder, whereas a test with high sensitivity is liberal in ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0078 Tc -0.0922 Tw (identifying the disorder.) Tj 96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0167 Tc -0.1167 Tw (The perfectly specific test ) Tj 106.08 0 TD -0.038 Tc -0.062 Tw (unerringly ) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.0204 Tc -0.1204 Tw (identifies all individuals ) Tj -248.64 -23.04 TD -0.0267 Tc -0.0733 Tw (who do not have) Tj 66.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.2625 Tc 0 Tw (\(C\)A) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.0151 Tc -0.0715 Tw (PD. It maximizes cases in the True Negative category without ) Tj -89.28 -23.04 TD 0.0072 Tc -0.0272 Tw (regard to the number of false negatives that will arise from its conservatism) Tj 301.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -309.12 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0138 Tc -0.0176 Tw (The reality, of course, is that both over) Tj 155.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0056 Tc -0.1056 Tw ( and underdiagnosis have their costs. ) Tj -188.64 -23.04 TD 0.0238 Tc -0.1238 Tw (Overdiagnosis ) Tj 60.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0529 Tc -0.0471 Tw (likely with high) Tj 62.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0158 Tc -0.1158 Tw (sensitivity\) ) Tj 47.04 0 TD 0.0015 Tc -0.1015 Tw (wastes resources by providing unneeded ) Tj -176.16 -23.04 TD 0.011 Tc -0.111 Tw (treatment, whereas underdiagnosis ) Tj 141.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.024 Tc -0.076 Tw (likely with ) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0231 Tc -0.0769 Tw (high specificity\) ) Tj 67.2 0 TD 0.0287 Tc -0.0327 Tw (incurs the risks related to ) Tj -257.28 -22.56 TD -0.0059 Tc 0.0088 Tw (the disorder itself: Underdiagnosing breast cancer at an early stage vastly increases the 5) Tj 356.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj -356.64 -23.52 TD -0.1153 Tc 0.4953 Tw (year mortality fo) Tj 67.2 0 TD -0.0111 Tc 0.042 Tw (r the disease, whereas underdiagnosing hay fever will have little impact ) Tj ET endstream endobj 22 0 obj 5432 endobj 20 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 21 0 R >> endobj 24 0 obj << /Length 25 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (5) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (5) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.013 Tc -0.0788 Tw (on mortality. Overdiagnosing breast cancer will result in increases in the costs associated ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0.0106 Tc -0.0094 Tw (with lumpectomy or biopsy, which are ) Tj 156.48 0 TD -0.0152 Tc -0.0848 Tw (traumatic but represent ) Tj 95.04 0 TD 0.012 Tc -0.112 Tw (relatively small costs ) Tj -251.52 -23.04 TD -0.0383 Tc 0 Tw (compar) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.0156 Tc -0.0836 Tw (ed with loss of life. Overdiagnosing hay fever results in relatively small costs in ) Tj -29.76 -23.04 TD 0 Tc -0.032 Tw (medication incurred by the patient. Thus, the costs associated with the playoff between ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0 Tc -0.0043 Tw (true positives and false positives ) Tj 132.48 0 TD -0.07 Tc -0.03 Tw (are ) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (always associated with the risks of failure) Tj 167.04 0 TD 0.19 Tc -0.05 Tw ( to ) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.1112 Tw (identify ) Tj -326.88 -23.04 TD -0.0058 Tc -0.0942 Tw (\(i.e., loss of health\)) Tj 76.8 0 TD 0.0037 Tc -0.0237 Tw (. The costs associated with true negatives and false negatives are ) Tj -76.8 -23.04 TD 0.0073 Tc -0.0636 Tw (similarly decided in terms of the costs associated with excessive diagnosis \() Tj 302.88 0 TD -0.028 Tc 0 Tw (e.g.,) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.0983 Tc -0.1983 Tw ( loss of ) Tj -319.68 -23.04 TD 0.0047 Tc -0.1047 Tw (economic resources\).) Tj 84.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -84.96 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0091 Tc -0.1091 Tw (When the true outcome is knowable \(such ) Tj 170.4 0 TD 0.0073 Tc -0.0273 Tw (as in cancer assessment and diagnosis, ) Tj -200.64 -22.56 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.0724 Tw (where signs and symptoms will ultimately prove the accuracy of the diagnosis\), one can ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.0132 Tc 0.0332 Tw (calculate the sensitivity of a measure. This implies not only an agreed) Tj 281.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0313 Tc -0.0687 Tw (upon definition of ) Tj -284.64 -22.56 TD 0.0119 Tc -0.0319 Tw (the disorder but a means of identifyin) Tj 150.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.0474 Tw (g the disorder accurately, both of which have been ) Tj -150.24 -23.52 TD -0.0069 Tc 0.0177 Tw (demonstrated for \(C\)APD with a reasonable degree of certainty in recent years \(ASHA, ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0.007 Tc 0.067 Tw (2005\). A focused and neurobiologically anchored definition of \(C\)APD has been ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0013 Tc 0.0187 Tw (promulgated by the American Speech) Tj 150.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0383 Tc (Langua) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.16 Tc (ge) Tj 9.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0185 Tc -0.1185 Tw (Hearing Association through an ) Tj -196.8 -23.04 TD 0.0538 Tc -0.1538 Tw (extensive peer) Tj 57.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0193 Tc -0.1193 Tw (review process \(ASHA, 2005\). Furthermore, efficient behavioral and ) Tj -60.48 -23.04 TD 0.0085 Tc -0.0716 Tw (electrophysiologic tests and procedures are available to diagnose \(C\)APD in the case of ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0091 Tc -0.0291 Tw (known, identifiable lesions \(Chermak & Musiek, 199) Tj 213.6 0 TD -0.0075 Tc -0.0925 Tw (7; Hendler, Squires, & Emmerich, ) Tj -213.6 -23.04 TD -0.0027 Tc 0.0504 Tw (1990; Jerger, Johnson, & Loiselle, 1988; Musiek, Shinn, Jirsa, Bamiou, Baran, & Zaidan, ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0093 Tc -0.0355 Tw (2005; Rappaport Gulliver, Phillips, van Dorpe, Maxner, & Bhan, 1994\). However, in the ) Tj T* -0.011 Tc 0.031 Tw (great majority of school children and in many adu) Tj 200.16 0 TD 0.0244 Tc -0.0644 Tw (lts who appear to have a form of ) Tj -200.16 -22.56 TD 0.0069 Tc -0.07 Tw (\(C\)APD based on behavioral tests and questionnaires, there is no demonstrable lesion. ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0021 Tc 0.0579 Tw (Electrophysiologic and topographic mapping studies are revealing) Tj 264.96 0 TD -0.0236 Tc -0.0764 Tw ( differences) Tj 46.56 0 TD -0.0078 Tc 0.1478 Tw (, however, ) Tj ET endstream endobj 25 0 obj 4338 endobj 23 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 24 0 R >> endobj 27 0 obj << /Length 28 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.0139 Tc -0.1139 Tw (in the neurophysiologic representation of auditor) Tj 195.36 0 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.1145 Tw (y stimuli in the CANS of subjects with ) Tj -195.36 -22.56 TD 0.001 Tc 0.019 Tw (behaviorally diagnosed \(C\)APD and listening) Tj 182.4 0 TD 0.0718 Tc -0.1718 Tw ( and learning) Tj 52.32 0 TD -0.0925 Tc -0.0075 Tw ( problems) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0562 Tc -0.1562 Tw (see for example ) Tj -279.84 -23.04 TD 0.0041 Tc -0.2241 Tw (Jerger et al., 2002; ) Tj 76.32 0 TD -0.0116 Tc -0.0084 Tw (King, Warrier, Hayes, & Kraus, 2002; ) Tj 155.52 0 TD -0.0081 Tc 0.0281 Tw (Musiek, Charette, Kelly, Lee, ) Tj -231.84 -23.04 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (& Musiek, 1999) Tj 65.76 0 TD -0.0185 Tc -0.0815 Tw (; Purdy, Kelly, & Davies, 2002; ) Tj 129.12 0 TD -0.0076 Tc 0.0036 Tw (Warrier, Johnson, Hayes, Nicol, & ) Tj -194.88 -23.04 TD 0.1064 Tc -0.2064 Tw (Kraus, 2004\)) Tj 52.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD ( ) Tj -29.28 -23.04 TD -0.0125 Tc 0.0191 Tw (The difficulty of electrophysiologically tracking behavioral test changes and ) Tj -30.24 -23.04 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.0776 Tw (myelination changes was underscored in a study by Schochat and Musiek \(2006\). ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.025 Tc 0.1307 Tw (\(AUTHOR: please add Schochat & Musiek to referenc) Tj 219.84 0 TD -0.136 Tc 0.036 Tw ( list\)) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.0087 Tc 0.1487 Tw ( They examined the ) Tj -237.6 -23.04 TD 0.0083 Tc -0.0714 Tw (maturation course of the frequency and duration pattern tests and the middle latency ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0.0206 Tc -0.0606 Tw (response \(MLR\) in 150 normal participants ranging from 7 to 16 years of age. Results ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.0108 Tc 0.0308 Tw (showed increased performance with increasing age for both be) Tj 250.56 0 TD 0.0143 Tc -0.1143 Tw (havioral tests up to age 12. ) Tj -250.56 -22.56 TD 0.0182 Tc -0.1182 Tw (However, there was no significant change across this age range for MLR on either ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.0427 Tw (latency or amplitude measures. Similarly, the P300 was inferior to two behavioral tests ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0 Tc -0.0196 Tw (in identifying individuals with confirmed central nervo) Tj 219.84 0 TD 0.0152 Tc -0.1152 Tw (us system lesions \(Hurley & ) Tj -219.84 -23.04 TD 0.0546 Tc -0.1546 Tw (Musiek, 1997\). ) Tj 66.24 0 TD -0.0664 Tc -0.0336 Tw (In contrast, ) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.0486 Tc -0.0514 Tw (Musiek, ) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (Baran) Tj 24 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw ( and ) Tj 19.2 0 TD 0.0837 Tc 0.2963 Tw (Pinheiro ) Tj 36.96 0 TD 0.1167 Tc -0.2167 Tw (\(1992\) ) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.0617 Tc 0.1217 Tw (\(AUTHOR: add Musiek, ) Tj -260.16 -23.04 TD 0.0053 Tc -0.1853 Tw (Baran & Pinheiro to reference list\) ) Tj 140.64 0 TD 0.0083 Tc 0.0289 Tw (reported significant differences in P300 latency and ) Tj -140.64 -23.04 TD 0.0115 Tc -0.1115 Tw (amplitude between adults with confirmed CANS lesions a) Tj 232.32 0 TD 0.0512 Tc -0.1512 Tw (nd normal controls.) Tj 78.24 0 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw ( O) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.1925 Tc 0 Tw (ther) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -335.52 -23.04 TD 0.0086 Tc -0.1086 Tw (studies ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.1725 Tc 0.2075 Tw (also ) Tj 19.2 0 TD -0.0078 Tc -0.0442 Tw (have demonstrated the ability of late evoked potentials to identify ) Tj -49.44 -23.04 TD 0.0134 Tc -0.1134 Tw (dysfunction in the central auditory nervous system. For example, Jerger et al. ) Tj 313.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.28 Tc (2002) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj -337.44 -23.04 TD -0 Tc 0.0371 Tw (studied dizygotic \(i.e., fraternal\) twin girls, one presenting) Tj 232.8 0 TD 0.0119 Tc -0.0159 Tw ( symptoms of \(C\)APD. They ) Tj -232.8 -23.04 TD -0.0143 Tc -0.0857 Tw (demonstrated that event) Tj 95.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0037 Tc 0.0334 Tw (related potential activation patterns differentiated the twins ) Tj -98.88 -22.56 TD -0.0019 Tc -0.0181 Tw (better than the behavioral tests \(i.e., dichotic listening within an oddball paradigm\) ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.0016 Tc -0.0184 Tw (performed concurrently, which showed essentially no perf) Tj 232.8 0 TD 0.0083 Tc -0.1083 Tw (ormance difference between ) Tj ET endstream endobj 28 0 obj 4748 endobj 26 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 5 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 27 0 R >> endobj 31 0 obj << /Length 32 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (7) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (7) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.0156 Tc -0.1156 Tw (the girls. ) Tj 37.44 0 TD -0.037 Tc -0.063 Tw (Similarly, ) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0.0262 Tc -0.1262 Tw (Estes, Jerger, ) Tj 55.68 0 TD -0.0133 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.1786 Tw ( Jacobson \(2002\) demonstrated the limitations of ) Tj -149.76 -22.56 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.0262 Tw (behavioral tests \(i.e., auditory gap detection and auditory movement detection\) relative to ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0265 Tc -0.0735 Tw (the capability of event) Tj 88.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0195 Tc -0.1195 Tw (related potentials \(i.e.) Tj 86.4 0 TD -0.1067 Tc 0.0067 Tw (, N1) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.0306 Tw (P2 and P300\) in differentiating normal ) Tj -199.2 -23.04 TD -0.0015 Tc -0.0985 Tw (versus poor listeners.) Tj 84.48 0 TD 1 0 0 rg 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -54.24 -23.04 TD 0 0 0 rg -0.0089 Tc -0.0911 Tw (Thus, it appears that) Tj 80.64 0 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0933 Tw (, although) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.0251 Tc -0.1251 Tw ( there are accepted physiologic measures of ) Tj -150.72 -23.04 TD 0.0243 Tc 0 Tw (\(C\)APD,) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.0021 Tc 0.0179 Tw ( and some may hold potential as screening measures,) Tj 212.16 0 TD 0.0368 Tc -0.1368 Tw ( when it comes to school ) Tj -247.68 -23.04 TD -0.0358 Tc 0.0958 Tw (screening where advanced elec) Tj 123.84 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (r) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0042 Tc -0.0158 Tw (ophysiological equipment will not be readily available) Tj 217.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -350.4 -23.04 TD 0.0138 Tc -0.1138 Tw (other screening tools must be used. Nonetheless, ) Tj 199.2 0 TD 0.0169 Tc -0.0209 Tw (sensitivity and specificity of screening ) Tj -199.2 -23.04 TD 0.092 Tc 0.288 Tw (tests ) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.052 Tc 0.192 Tw (may be ) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.0357 Tc 0 Tw (derived) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw ( ultimately) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.0207 Tc -0.1207 Tw ( from patients with known, confirmed central auditory ) Tj -124.8 -22.56 TD 0.0473 Tc -0.1473 Tw (dysfunction \(ASHA, 2005\)) Tj 108.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0084 Tc -0.0284 Tw (Albeit with some reservations, it is ) Tj 141.6 0 TD -0.021 Tc -0.079 Tw (our opinion) Tj 46.56 0 TD -0.03 Tc -0.07 Tw ( that ) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (interim ) Tj -324 -23.52 TD 0.003 Tc -0.0345 Tw (steps to estimate sensitivity and specificity may ) Tj 192.96 0 TD 0.0367 Tc 0 Tw (use) Tj 13.44 0 TD -0.0118 Tc -0.0882 Tw ( performance ) Tj 55.2 0 TD 0.0332 Tc 0.0268 Tw (outside normal limits ) Tj 87.84 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw (on ) Tj -349.44 -22.56 TD 0 Tc -0.1007 Tw (behavioral tests ) Tj 64.8 0 TD -0.03 Tc -0.07 Tw (that ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.09 Tc -0.19 Tw (are ) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0 Tc 0.0193 Tw (expected to have predictive power) Tj 137.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.0021 Tc 0.0221 Tw (\(See Spaulding, Plante, and ) Tj -241.44 -23.52 TD -0.0567 Tc -0.0433 Tw (Farinella ) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw ([) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.28 Tc (2006) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (]) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0159 Tc -0.1159 Tw ( for discussion of the potential adverse consequences of such an ) Tj -64.8 -22.56 TD -0.024 Tc -0.076 Tw (approach.\) ) Tj 44.64 0 TD 0.0261 Tc -0.0781 Tw (These established behavioral tests will need to be used to ) Tj 231.36 0 TD 0.0045 Tc 0.1355 Tw (estimate the ) Tj -276 -23.04 TD 0.003 Tc -0.183 Tw (efficiency \(i.e., sensitivity and specificity\) of ) Tj 181.44 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.2712 Tw (screening procedures until ) Tj 108 0 TD 0.226 Tc -0.326 Tw (a true) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw ( gold ) Tj -312.48 -23.04 TD -0.035 Tc 0 Tw (standard) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.065 Tc (elec) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.08 Tc (\227) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.0175 Tc -0.1175 Tw (trophysiological ) Tj 67.68 0 TD 0.395 Tc 0 Tw (or) Tj 8.64 0 TD -0.0027 Tc -0.0973 Tw ( neuroimaging procedures) Tj 104.16 0 TD 0.08 Tc 0 Tw (\227) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.16 Tc (ha) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0093 Tc 0.0507 Tw ( demonstrated the ) Tj 0.48 w 1 J 1 j 0.7843 0.3176 0 RG ET 112.32 372.96 m 111.36 373.92 l S 111.36 373.92 m 111.36 383.52 l S 111.36 383.52 m 112.32 384 l S 110.4 372.96 m 111.36 373.92 l S 111.36 373.92 m 111.36 383.52 l S 111.36 383.52 m 110.4 384 l S BT 77.76 352.32 TD 0.0069 Tc -0.1069 Tw (efficiency of these behavioral tests with ) Tj 161.28 0 TD 0.008 Tc -0.108 Tw (a large sample of school) Tj 97.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1467 Tc (age) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.2 Tc (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0256 Tc -0.0744 Tw ( children.) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -318.24 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0089 Tc -0.1569 Tw (Sensitivity of a test is defined as the proportion of ) Tj 201.6 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0633 Tc -0.1633 Tw (rue ) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0344 Tc -0.0144 Tw (ositives that are identified ) Tj -254.88 -23.04 TD 0.0381 Tc -0.1381 Tw (\(e.g., 5\) compared) Tj 72.96 0 TD -0.0016 Tc -0.0298 Tw ( with the total of those with the disorder \(e.g., 7\), yielding a percentage ) Tj -72.96 -23.04 TD -0.098 Tc 0 Tw (\(e.g.) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (71) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (%\). The specificity of a test is defined as the proportion of ) Tj 238.08 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0633 Tc -0.1633 Tw (rue ) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (n) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (egatives ) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.09 Tc 0.29 Tw (that ) Tj -331.68 -23.04 TD -0.0108 Tc -0.0892 Tw (are identified ) Tj 55.2 0 TD -0.002 Tc 0 Tw (\(e.g.) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0098 Tc -0.0729 Tw ( 12\) as compared with the total number who do not have the disorde) Tj 272.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (r ) Tj -348 -22.56 TD -0.0029 Tc -0.0171 Tw (\(e.g., 48\), yielding a percentage \(e.g., ) Tj 151.68 0 TD 0.0195 Tc -0.1195 Tw (25%\). A 71% hit rate is lau) Tj 111.84 0 TD 0.0229 Tc -0.1229 Tw (dable, but a specificity ) Tj [0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 ] 0 d ET 464.16 390.24 m 441.6 372.48 l S [0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 ] 0 d 441.6 372.48 m 111.84 372.48 l S 1 0.949 0.9176 rg 583.68 393.12 m 583.68 394.56 582.72 395.52 581.28 395.52 c 466.56 395.52 l 465.12 395.52 464.16 394.56 464.16 393.12 c 464.16 386.88 l 464.16 385.44 465.12 384.48 466.56 384.48 c 581.28 384.48 l 582.72 384.48 583.68 385.44 583.68 386.88 c h b* q 468 385.92 33.12 7.68 re h W n BT 468 387.36 TD 0 0 0 rg /F3 6.8 Tf -0.0408 Tc 0 Tw (Comment) Tj ET Q q 500.64 385.92 4.32 7.68 re h W n BT 500.64 387.36 TD 0 0 0 rg /F3 6.8 Tf -0.0684 Tc -0.004 Tw (: ) Tj ET Q BT 504.48 387.36 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 6.8 Tf 0 Tc 0.22 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 32 0 obj 7355 endobj 29 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F3 33 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 31 0 R >> endobj 36 0 obj << /Length 37 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (8) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (8) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.1071 Tc -0.2071 Tw (of 25% is ) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0 Tc -0.0396 Tw (expensive. It is within this context of costs and benefits that we must enter the ) Tj -41.28 -22.56 TD -0.0017 Tc -0.0023 Tw (examination of screening instruments for \(C\)APD) Tj 200.16 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -202.56 -23.04 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.015 Tc -0.085 Tw (It is important t) Tj 61.44 0 TD 0.0045 Tc 0.0155 Tw (o note that the prevalence of a disease or disorder influences a ) Tj -91.68 -23.04 TD -0.0173 Tc 0.0133 Tw (test\222s efficiency. If the disorder ) Tj 127.2 0 TD 0.0109 Tc -0.0423 Tw (occurs rarely in the population \(as does ) Tj 159.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw ([) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (]) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.1067 Tc 0.0067 Tw (APD ) Tj -300.96 -23.04 TD -0.025 Tc -0.075 Tw (estimated as 2) Tj 56.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0672 Tc -0.1672 Tw (3% based on Chermak & Musiek, 1997\)) Tj 162.24 0 TD -0.0383 Tc -0.0617 Tw (, the chances of detecting it ) Tj 110.88 0 TD 0.09 Tc 0 Tw (are) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -345.12 -23.04 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (low) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.08 Tc (\227) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.16 Tc 0.06 Tw (even ) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (by ) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.36 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0012 Tc -0.1012 Tw (test with ) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0.0038 Tc 0.0402 Tw (high sensitivity. In this same situation, the chances of persons ) Tj -102.24 -23.04 TD 0.006 Tc -0.106 Tw (passing the test would be high) Tj 120.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0211 Tc -0.0789 Tw (because most people do) Tj 95.04 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( no) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.0252 Tc 0.0668 Tw (t have the disorder. Hence, th) Tj 117.6 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (is ) Tj -348.48 -23.04 TD 0.0017 Tc 0 Tw (test\222s) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw ( positive predictive value) Tj 100.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 6.24 0 TD 0.0111 Tc -0.0238 Tw (defined as the ratio of those with the disorder who were ) Tj -127.68 -23.04 TD -0.041 Tc -0.059 Tw (identified ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.024 Tc -0.084 Tw (by the test to the total number of those failing the test\) ) Tj 219.36 0 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.0969 Tw (would be low and ) Tj 73.44 0 TD 0.05 Tc 0 Tw (its) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -343.2 -22.56 TD -0.0277 Tc 0.0877 Tw (negative predictive value would be high. ) Tj 164.64 0 TD 0.05 Tc 0 Tw (C) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.0322 Tc -0.0678 Tw (linicians ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.0575 Tc -0.1575 Tw (must ) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.0135 Tc 0.0785 Tw (be aware of the approximate ) Tj -229.92 -23.52 TD 0.0167 Tc -0.1167 Tw (prevalence of ) Tj 56.64 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0136 Tc -0.0069 Tw ( disorder in order to have some general idea ) Tj 178.08 0 TD -0.0967 Tc -0.0033 Tw (of a ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.2475 Tc 0 Tw (test) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.01 Tc (\222s) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.0027 Tc 0.0627 Tw ( positive and ) Tj -277.44 -22.56 TD -0.0733 Tc 0 Tw (negati) Tj 24.48 0 TD -0.0029 Tc 0.1429 Tw (ve predictive value) Tj 75.84 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw ( \(See Chapter 7 for further discussion of the concepts of test ) Tj -107.04 -23.52 TD -0.0037 Tc 0.0104 Tw (sensitivity and efficiency within the framework of clinical decision analysis.\)) Tj 308.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -308.64 -21.12 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj 0 -20.64 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.006 Tc -0.094 Tw (/H2/Sensitivity ) Tj 62.88 0 TD 0.0917 Tc 0 Tw (Versus) Tj 27.84 0 TD 0.1625 Tc -0.2625 Tw ( Validity) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -125.76 -23.04 TD -0.0053 Tc -0.0947 Tw (Before leaving the topic of test sensitivity and specificit) Tj 223.2 0 TD 0.0267 Tc -0.0581 Tw (y, it is important to note the ) Tj -223.2 -23.04 TD 0.0619 Tc -0.1619 Tw (relationship of th) Tj 68.16 0 TD -0.0967 Tc 0 Tw (ese) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.0143 Tc -0.1143 Tw ( concept) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0683 Tc -0.1683 Tw ( to test ) Tj 29.28 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.1288 Tc 0 Tw (validity) Tj 31.68 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0223 Tc -0.0538 Tw (. Ascertaining that a test is valid \() Tj 134.4 0 TD 0.032 Tc -0.132 Tw (i.e., ) Tj -313.92 -23.04 TD -0.007 Tc -0.013 Tw (measures what is purported to measure\) ) Tj 161.76 0 TD 0.0129 Tc -0.1129 Tw (does not ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.1067 Tw (imply that ) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0114 Tc -0.0886 Tw (the test is sensitive \(or ) Tj -240.96 -23.04 TD -0.0389 Tc 0 Tw (specific\)) Tj 34.08 0 TD 0.0384 Tc -0.0184 Tw ( \(Musiek & Chermak, 200) Tj 106.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (7) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (AUTHOR: Clari) Tj 66.72 0 TD 0.0035 Tc 0.0765 Tw (fy If chapter 1 of this volume is ) Tj -222.24 -23.04 TD 0.0079 Tc -0.1879 Tw (meant? Or add to reference list.\) ) Tj 132 0 TD -0.0327 Tc 0.0527 Tw (In contrast to validity, s) Tj 94.56 0 TD 0.0021 Tc -0.1021 Tw (ensitivity and specificity speak ) Tj -226.56 -23.04 TD -0.0033 Tc -0 Tw (to the degree to which a valid measure of a domain reliably identifies a bivalent state) Tj 339.36 0 TD 0.08 Tc 0 Tw (\227) Tj -339.36 -23.04 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (disease/nondiseased. ) Tj 87.84 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (\(See Chapter 1 for ) Tj 76.32 0 TD 0.0033 Tc -0.1033 Tw (additional discussion of this distinction.\)) Tj 162.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -326.4 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (1) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0234 Tc 0.0834 Tw (Screening Instruments for \(C\)APD) Tj 139.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 37 0 obj 6139 endobj 35 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 36 0 R >> endobj 39 0 obj << /Length 40 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 174.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (9) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 355.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (9) Tj -355.2 558.24 TD 0.0074 Tc -0.0674 Tw (Screening instruments for \(C\)APD, therefore, should identify a high proportion of those ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0.0126 Tc -0.1126 Tw (with the disorder by use of a relatively brief ) Tj 177.6 0 TD -0.0331 Tc 0.1731 Tw (and \223inexpensive\224 ) Tj 76.32 0 TD -0.0156 Tc 0 Tw (procedure) Tj 40.32 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( that is eas) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0.06 Tc 0.08 Tw (y to ) Tj -336 -23.04 TD 0.0113 Tc -0.1113 Tw (administer and optimally, not influenced by hearing loss, language, cognition, culture or ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0079 Tc -0.0921 Tw (other nonauditory factors.) Tj 103.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0035 Tc -0.2165 Tw (The Bruton conference summary ) Tj 134.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (Jerger & Musiek, 2000\) ) Tj -243.84 -23.04 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (suggested a ) Tj 48.48 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (10) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0373 Tc 0.4173 Tw (minute procedure) Tj 70.08 0 TD 0.38 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (Our experimental hybrid ) Tj 101.28 0 TD -0.0033 Tc 0.3833 Tw (screening procedure ) Tj 83.52 0 TD 0.355 Tc 0 Tw (us) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.12 Tc (e) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0067 Tc 0.3867 Tw (2.5 ) Tj -342.24 -23.04 TD -0.014 Tc -0.086 Tw (times ) Tj 24 0 TD -0.0233 Tc 0.0833 Tw ( that much time) Tj 62.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0281 Tc -0.1281 Tw ( which we consider practical in a school situation where a mass ) Tj -88.8 -23.04 TD -0.0185 Tc 0.0785 Tw (screening might logically be used only ) Tj 156.96 0 TD 0.0088 Tc -0.1088 Tw (once during the primary grades) Tj 125.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (S) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.066 Tc -0.166 Tw (creening is ) Tj -294.72 -23.04 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\223) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0029 Tc (allowed) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.12 Tc (\224) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0142 Tc -0.1142 Tw ( to have lower expectations concerning specificity than sensitivity. ) Tj 271.68 0 TD -0.0667 Tc -0.0333 Tw (Indeed, as ) Tj -312 -23.04 TD -0.0097 Tc -0.0103 Tw (noted above, a high sensitivity rate, ) Tj 144 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.1243 Tc -0.2243 Tw (at times) Tj 31.68 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0129 Tc -0.1129 Tw (takes its toll in reduced ) Tj 95.04 0 TD 0.0115 Tc -0.1115 Tw (specificity; however, ) Tj -275.52 -22.56 TD 0.0237 Tc -0.0868 Tw (this is acceptable with a screening measure because the next step is to follow) Tj 307.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0086 Tc 0.0686 Tw (up with a ) Tj -310.08 -23.52 TD -0.0046 Tc -0.0354 Tw (more extensive diagnostic test battery. Hence, one must keep) Tj 243.84 0 TD -0.009 Tc 0.069 Tw ( in mind that a screening ) Tj -243.84 -22.56 TD 0.0195 Tc -0.1195 Tw (procedure leads to an in) Tj 95.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0051 Tc 0.0016 Tw (depth diagnostic assessment before a final diagnosis can be ) Tj -98.88 -23.52 TD -0.128 Tc 0 Tw (made.) Tj 24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.1476 Tw (The cost of performing further diagnostic testing is low relative to the cost of ) Tj -29.28 -22.56 TD -0.0034 Tc -0 Tw (failure to identify. Thus, a screening test for \(C\)APD s) Tj 220.32 0 TD 0.0264 Tc -0.1264 Tw (hould err on the side of increased ) Tj -220.32 -23.04 TD -0.0291 Tc -0.5509 Tw (sensitivity ) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.08 Tc 0.3 Tw (even ) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.0142 Tc -0.1142 Tw (at the cost of diminished specificity.) Tj 144.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -209.76 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0283 Tc 0.4083 Tw (The ASHA \(1996) Tj 71.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2005) Tj 22.08 0 TD -0.0124 Tc -0.0076 Tw (\) guidelines for \(C\)APD state that ) Tj 137.28 0 TD 0.0067 Tc 0.1333 Tw (a diagnosis of \(C\)APD ) Tj -263.52 -23.04 TD -0.0139 Tc -0.2461 Tw (requires demonstration of ) Tj 104.64 0 TD 0.0126 Tc -0.0326 Tw ( a deficiency in one or more of the following areas: ) Tj 210.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.12 Tc (a) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.45 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj -323.04 -23.04 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.28 Tc (ud) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.0022 Tc 0.1422 Tw (itory pattern recognition) Tj 96.96 0 TD 0.38 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (b) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (\) temporal ) Tj 44.16 0 TD -0.053 Tc 0 Tw (processing) Tj 42.24 0 TD -0.003 Tc 0.023 Tw ( \(including temporal integration, ) Tj -211.2 -23.04 TD -0.0019 Tc -0.0981 Tw (discrimination, ordering, and masking\), \() Tj 164.16 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0337 Tc -0.1337 Tw (auditory ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.001 Tc 0.019 Tw (performance with degraded acoustic ) Tj -210.24 -23.04 TD -0.06 Tc 0 Tw (signals) Tj 27.84 0 TD -0.0042 Tc -0.0958 Tw ( \(monaural low redundancy\),) Tj 115.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0118 Tc -0.3518 Tw (\(d\) auditory ) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.022 Tc -0.122 Tw (performance with ) Tj 73.44 0 TD 0.0218 Tc -0.1218 Tw (competing acoustic ) Tj -269.28 -23.04 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.1112 Tw (signals \() Tj 33.12 0 TD 0.0156 Tc -0.1156 Tw (including ) Tj 40.32 0 TD 0.0242 Tc 0.1158 Tw (dichotic listening\), ) Tj 77.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.12 Tc (e) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.1008 Tw (\) auditory discrimination, ) Tj 104.16 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD (f) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0255 Tc -0.1255 Tw (ocalization ) Tj -295.68 -22.56 TD -0.225 Tc 0 Tw (and/) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.0562 Tc -0.1562 Tw (or lateralization) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw ( \(binaural interaction\)) Tj 86.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0065 Tc 0.0306 Tw (The guidelines do not differentiate verbal and ) Tj -174.72 -23.52 TD 0.0104 Tc -0.1104 Tw (nonverbal acoustic stimuli) Tj 105.6 0 TD -0.0446 Tc -0.0554 Tw (. A significant ) Tj 61.44 0 TD 0.128 Tc -0.228 Tw (issue ) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.0026 Tc -0.1026 Tw (in using a screening me) Tj 94.08 0 TD -0.0236 Tc 0.0836 Tw (asure for \(C\)APD ) Tj ET endstream endobj 40 0 obj 6717 endobj 38 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 39 0 R >> endobj 42 0 obj << /Length 43 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (10) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (10) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0117 Tc -0.0883 Tw (is that) Tj 24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0064 Tc -0.1064 Tw (the screener ) Tj 50.4 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (should ) Tj 29.28 0 TD 0.085 Tc -0.025 Tw (be able to ) Tj 41.76 0 TD -0.0009 Tc -0.0511 Tw (identify a \223fail\224 in each of those categories to ensure ) Tj -147.84 -22.56 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (inclusion, since a ) Tj 71.04 0 TD 0.0883 Tc -0.1883 Tw (\223true\224 ) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.0033 Tc -0.0967 Tw (fail in any ) Tj 42.72 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.3067 Tc 0 Tw (one) Tj 14.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0341 Tc -0.1341 Tw ( of those categories) Tj 77.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0183 Tc -0.1183 Tw ( signal) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.0525 Tc -0.1525 Tw (s the) Tj 18.72 0 TD -0.011 Tc 0.071 Tw ( presence of ) Tj -280.8 -23.04 TD -0.195 Tc 0 Tw (\(C\)APD) Tj 33.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.1018 Tc 0 Tw (sensitivity) Tj 41.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.38 Tc -0.48 Tw (. ) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.003 Tc -0.103 Tw (An alternat) Tj 44.64 0 TD -0.29 Tc 0 Tw (iv) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.36 Tc 0.02 Tw (e ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (strategy ) Tj 34.08 0 TD 0.0771 Tc -0.1771 Tw (is to use ) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.0111 Tc -0.0889 Tw (failure on ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.0495 Tc -0.0535 Tw (one of the cardinal signs ) Tj -260.64 -23.04 TD -0.0475 Tc -0.0525 Tw (of \(C\)APD) Tj 44.16 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.25 Tw ( \(e.g., temporal ) Tj 62.88 0 TD 0.043 Tc 0 Tw (processing) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0243 Tc 0.0043 Tw (\) as an indicator of the need) Tj 110.88 0 TD 0.0022 Tc -0.1982 Tw ( for assessment in all ) Tj -261.12 -23.04 TD -0.0414 Tc 0 Tw (domains) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.024 Tc 0.404 Tw (. This ) Tj 25.44 0 TD -0.0288 Tc 0 Tw (alternat) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.19 Tc (iv) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.36 Tc 0.02 Tw (e ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0071 Tc -0.1756 Tw (strategy assumes the interdependence across categories of ) Tj -103.68 -23.04 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.1008 Tw (central auditory processes) Tj 104.16 0 TD 0.0517 Tc -0.1517 Tw ( \(and their underlyin) Tj 81.6 0 TD -0.0183 Tc 0.0783 Tw (g neural substrate\). ) Tj 79.2 0 TD -0.1025 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.1145 Tw ( such overlap ) Tj -302.4 -23.04 TD 0.0021 Tc 0.0579 Tw (might be anticipated, ) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.0158 Tc -0.1158 Tw (our research has suggested that these processes can in fact ) Tj 235.2 0 TD -0.0114 Tc 0.3914 Tw (present ) Tj -321.6 -23.04 TD -0.0246 Tc -0.0754 Tw (independently; therefore,) Tj 100.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.006 Tc -0.346 Tw (we consider ) Tj 50.4 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (a one) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0667 Tc -0.1667 Tw (test screener) Tj 49.44 0 TD 0.0181 Tc 0.0419 Tw ( inferior to the hybrid process ) Tj -227.52 -23.04 TD -0.0623 Tc 0.4423 Tw (described here) Tj 57.6 0 TD 0.38 Tc -0.48 Tw (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0221 Tc -0.1221 Tw (We recognize the ) Tj 72.96 0 TD -0.0213 Tc -0.0787 Tw (downside of using a multiple) Tj 115.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.023 Tc -0.077 Tw (test screener: greater ) Tj -257.28 -22.56 TD -0.0185 Tc 0.0625 Tw (sensitivity may be achieved at the cost of poorer specificity. ) Tj 241.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -241.92 -23.52 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0276 Tc 0.1676 Tw (We recommend behavioral) Tj 108 0 TD -0.0043 Tc 0.0243 Tw ( strategies for screening \(C\)APD) Tj 131.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (T) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0206 Tc -0.1206 Tw (he success of these ) Tj -282.72 -22.56 TD 0 Tc -0.1007 Tw (behavioral tests ) Tj 64.8 0 TD 0.0425 Tc 0.0175 Tw (is used to ) Tj 40.32 0 TD 0.0362 Tc -0.1362 Tw (determine sensitivity and specif) Tj 126.72 0 TD -0.0258 Tc -0.0742 Tw (icity. Following this) Tj 83.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.07 Tc -0.03 Tw ( we ) Tj -318.24 -23.52 TD 0.0343 Tc -0.1343 Tw (suggest ) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.0462 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0.0243 Tc -0.1243 Tw ( surveys) Tj 33.12 0 TD 0.0248 Tc -0.0448 Tw ( can be used successfully to ) Tj 113.28 0 TD 0.0736 Tc -0.1736 Tw (provide good) Tj 53.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw ( functional ) Tj -288 -22.56 TD 0.001 Tc -0.0272 Tw (information on an individual\222s everyday problems. Once a diagnosis is made, such ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0092 Tc -0.0908 Tw (questionnaire ) Tj 56.16 0 TD 0.0141 Tc -0.1141 Tw (information can assist intervention planning, in c) Tj 195.84 0 TD 0.0052 Tc -0.1052 Tw (ounseling/collaborating ) Tj -252 -23.04 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.1106 Tw (with parents or other professionals) Tj 138.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0222 Tc -0.1222 Tw ( and even contribute as an outcome measure to ) Tj -140.64 -23.04 TD 0.0012 Tc -0.1012 Tw (monitor across the course of therapy. ) Tj 152.64 0 TD 0.07 Tc 0.31 Tw (Physiologic ) Tj 50.4 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw (tests ) Tj 20.16 0 TD -0.0019 Tc 0.0619 Tw (are usually used in a more ) Tj -223.2 -23.04 TD -0.0575 Tc -0.0425 Tw (detailed ) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.028 Tc 0 Tw (assessment) Tj 44.16 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0082 Tc 0.0282 Tw ( but not in screening) Tj 81.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0.48 Tw (. ) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.0291 Tc -0.0709 Tw (The authors\222 ) Tj 53.28 0 TD -0.0317 Tc 0.4117 Tw (hybrid ) Tj 28.32 0 TD 0.025 Tc 0 Tw (st) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw (rategy ) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.0347 Tc 0.1747 Tw (using behavioral ) Tj -286.08 -23.04 TD 0.092 Tc 0.288 Tw (tests ) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.455 Tc 0 Tw (is) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.0029 Tc -0.0971 Tw ( presented at the culmination of this review.) Tj 175.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0229 Tc 0.0189 Tw ( The most widely used ) Tj 92.64 0 TD -0.006 Tc -0.094 Tw (instrument ) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.5333 Tw (for ) Tj -343.2 -23.04 TD -0.0171 Tc -0.0829 Tw (the behavioral approach ) Tj 97.92 0 TD 0.0147 Tc 0.0453 Tw (to screening \(C\)APD ) Tj 87.36 0 TD 0.062 Tc 0.078 Tw (is the ) Tj 24 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.012 Tc 0 Tw (SCAN:) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0259 Tc -0.0299 Tw ( A Screening Test for ) Tj -239.52 -23.04 TD 0.0385 Tc -0.1385 Tw (Auditory Processing Disorders) Tj 124.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0162 Tc -0.1162 Tw ( \(Keith, 2000a,) Tj 60 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2006) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.41 Tc 0 Tw (b\).) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.205 Tc -0.065 Tw ( Th) Tj 16.32 0 TD -0.174 Tc 0.554 Tw (e SCAN) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.025 Tc 0 Tw (is) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw ( discussed in a later ) Tj -276.48 -22.56 TD 0.0671 Tc 0 Tw (section) Tj 28.32 0 TD -0.034 Tc -0.066 Tw ( of thi) Tj 23.52 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.0214 Tc -0.0786 Tw ( chapter) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 43 0 obj 7324 endobj 41 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 42 0 R >> endobj 45 0 obj << /Length 46 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (11) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (11) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD /F0 8.4 Tf 0 Tc -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0323 Tc 0 Tw (Questionnaire) Tj 55.68 0 TD 0.1167 Tc -0.2167 Tw ( survey) Tj 28.8 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0044 Tc -0.1044 Tw (typically ) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.09 Tc 0.29 Tw (are ) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.0081 Tc -0.1081 Tw (presented to caregivers) Tj 92.16 0 TD 0.019 Tc -0.119 Tw ( or teachers) Tj 46.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj -316.8 -22.56 TD -0.0139 Tc -0.0861 Tw (observable signs are ) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0.0307 Tc -0.1307 Tw (identified that ) Tj 58.56 0 TD 0.0295 Tc -0.1295 Tw (serve as indicators of ) Tj 87.36 0 TD 0.0229 Tc -0.1229 Tw (disorder or dysfunction) Tj 93.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -324.96 -23.04 TD -0.0425 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0087 Tc -0.0127 Tw ( questionnaires have advantages in ) Tj 141.6 0 TD 0.0092 Tc -0.0132 Tw (sampling behaviors characteristic of \(C\)APD ) Tj -179.04 -23.04 TD 0.004 Tc -0.064 Tw (filtered through the eyes of someone familiar with the individual and revealing ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.027 Tw (information that can be used to guide treatment decisions, they present limitations as ) Tj T* -0.0197 Tc -0 Tw (well. Questionnaires are affected by the subj) Tj 177.6 0 TD 0.0155 Tc -0.1155 Tw (ectivity and biases of the respondent. ) Tj -177.6 -23.04 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (Q) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0425 Tc -0.1425 Tw (uestions ) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.056 Tc -0.044 Tw (can be ) Tj 27.84 0 TD 0.0011 Tc 0.3789 Tw (unclear, misleading) Tj 78.24 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (, too broad,) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.014 Tc -0.086 Tw ( or inappropriate) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0232 Tc 0.0832 Tw ( Also, questionnaires ) Tj -263.52 -23.04 TD 0.0163 Tc -0.1163 Tw (can be too lengthy, leading to inaccurate information) Tj 211.2 0 TD 0.068 Tc 0.152 Tw ( due to ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.068 Tc -0.512 Tw (respondent ) Tj 46.08 0 TD 0.0233 Tc -0.1233 Tw (fatigue or lack of ) Tj -287.52 -23.04 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (interest) Tj 29.28 0 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( \(Maxwell ) Tj 44.16 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (&) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0162 Tc 0.0438 Tw ( Satake, 2006\). ) Tj 62.88 0 TD 0.205 Tc 0 Tw (Th) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.012 Tc 0.048 Tw (e questionnaire described later in this chapter) Tj 180.96 0 TD 0.0367 Tc 0.1033 Tw ( has ) Tj -335.52 -22.56 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.0719 Tw (items carefully selected to avoid many of these problems. Furthermore, all referrals are ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.0085 Tc 0.0152 Tw (based on the behavioral test and not on the questionnaire) Tj 227.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0212 Tc -0.0412 Tw ( which is used only to ) Tj -229.44 -22.56 TD 0.0052 Tc 0.0148 Tw (supplement and contextualize the ) Tj 135.84 0 TD -0.0036 Tc -0.0964 Tw (behavioral test findings) Tj 93.6 0 TD 0.0226 Tc -0.2186 Tw ( after a diagnostic battery ) Tj -229.44 -23.52 TD -0.0638 Tc -0.0362 Tw (confirms ) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.1067 Tc (APD) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.18 Tw ( ) Tj -81.12 -22.56 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0767 Tc 0.4567 Tw (Behavioral Tests) Tj 67.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -85.44 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (I) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.0146 Tw (nstruments for screening and assessment ) Tj 165.12 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (should ) Tj 29.28 0 TD -0.525 Tc 0 Tw (re) Tj 7.68 0 TD -0.098 Tc (flect) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.0492 Tc 0.0108 Tw ( the ASHA \(1996) Tj 71.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw ( 2005) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj -319.2 -23.04 TD -0.0092 Tc 0.0052 Tw (definition of \(C\)APD. Table ) Tj 118.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0168 Tc 0.0032 Tw ( presents potential tests ) Tj 95.52 0 TD -0.0027 Tc -0.0973 Tw (and subtests ) Tj 50.88 0 TD -0.0222 Tc -0.0778 Tw (that refle) Tj 36 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (ct ) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.2933 Tw (the ) Tj -323.52 -23.04 TD -0.042 Tc 0 Tw (seven) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.036 Tc -0.136 Tw (ASHA \(2005\) ) Tj 59.04 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (test ) Tj 16.32 0 TD 0.02 Tc 0.36 Tw (areas ) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.0083 Tc 0.114 Tw (derived from the six central auditory processes ) Tj 189.6 0 TD -0.041 Tc -0.059 Tw (identified ) Tj -313.44 -23.04 TD -0.0767 Tc -0.0233 Tw (above. ) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0239 Tc 0.0199 Tw (These seven test areas are: ) Tj 108 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0263 Tc -0.5537 Tw (auditory ) Tj 36 0 TD -0.1588 Tc 0 Tw (pattern/) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.0579 Tc -0.1579 Tw (temporal tests, ) Tj 61.44 0 TD -0.0413 Tc -0.0587 Tw (monaural ) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw (low ) Tj -312 -23.04 TD -0.0313 Tc 0 Tw (redundan) Tj 36.96 0 TD 0.32 Tc (cy) Tj 9.6 0 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw ( tests,) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.1145 Tw (binaural/dichotic speech tests, ) Tj 125.76 0 TD 0.0437 Tc 0 Tw (binaural) Tj 32.16 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0182 Tc -0.1182 Tw (interaction tests, ) Tj 68.16 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.6357 Tw (uditory ) Tj -304.32 -23.04 TD 0.009 Tc -0.109 Tw (discrimination tests, ) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0.024 Tc -0.124 Tw (electroacoustical tests, and electrophysiologic tests.) Tj 206.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -163.2 -22.56 TD -0.0917 Tc 0.2317 Tw (Insert Table 6) Tj 55.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.027 Tc -0.073 Tw (2 about here) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -54.24 -23.52 TD ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 46 0 obj 6383 endobj 44 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 45 0 R >> endobj 48 0 obj << /Length 49 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (12) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (12) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.2029 Tc 0.5829 Tw (The SCAN) Tj 44.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw (seems to ) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0192 Tc -0.1192 Tw (dominate clinical use as a screening instrument, although it ) Tj -116.64 -22.56 TD 0.0336 Tc -0.1336 Tw (only looks at ) Tj 54.24 0 TD -0.04 Tc 0.42 Tw (two ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.0317 Tc 0.3483 Tw (\(i.e., ) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.0168 Tc -0.1168 Tw (binaural /dichotic tests ) Tj 93.12 0 TD -0.095 Tc -0.005 Tw (and monaura) Tj 51.36 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0577 Tc -0.1577 Tw ( low redundancy) Tj 66.72 0 TD 0.092 Tc -0.192 Tw ( tests) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.018 Tc -0.118 Tw (of the ) Tj -332.64 -23.04 TD -0.042 Tc 0 Tw (seven) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (test ) Tj 16.32 0 TD 0.02 Tc 0 Tw (areas) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.0117 Tc -0.0883 Tw ( listed ) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.024 Tc 0 Tw (above) Tj 24 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw (Several other tests ) Tj 75.36 0 TD 0.0192 Tc -0.1192 Tw (and procedures ) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.0639 Tc 0.3239 Tw (have been proposed as ) Tj -259.2 -23.04 TD 0.0031 Tc -0.1031 Tw (screening tools for \(C\)APD including ) Tj 152.64 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.2933 Tw (the ) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (S) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.0329 Tc 0.2929 Tw (elective Auditory Attention Test \(S) Tj 141.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (AAT) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc (, ) Tj -337.92 -23.04 TD -0.2 Tc (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (ichotic ) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0083 Tc -0.0917 Tw (igits, ) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (f) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0387 Tc (requency) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.045 Tc -0.055 Tw (atterns, ) Tj 31.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (g) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.08 Tc -0.18 Tw (ap ) Tj 12.48 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0089 Tc -0.0911 Tw (etection, ) Tj 36.48 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0611 Tc -0.1611 Tw (nd so forth) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0218 Tc -0.1218 Tw (Bellis, 2003) Tj 48.96 0 TD -0.38 Tc -0.2 Tw (; ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0043 Tc -0.0957 Tw (Cherry, ) Tj -306.72 -23.04 TD 0.052 Tc -0.632 Tw (1980; ) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.0184 Tc -0.2384 Tw (Jerger & Musiek, 2000; ) Tj 97.44 0 TD 0.0709 Tc -0.1709 Tw (Musiek, 1983) Tj 55.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.19 Tc 0.09 Tw (. S) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (ome ) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.0457 Tc 0.3343 Tw (authors ) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.0283 Tc 0.1683 Tw (have proposed ) Tj 60.48 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj -306.24 -23.04 TD 0.0175 Tc -0.1175 Tw (requirement to isolate ) Tj 89.76 0 TD -0.0212 Tc -0.2388 Tw (auditory from other ) Tj 80.16 0 TD 0.0435 Tc -0.1435 Tw (sensory modalities ) Tj 77.76 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (in assessment of \(C\)APD ) Tj -247.68 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.016 Tc -0.116 Tw (Cacace & McFarland, 1998\). Nonetheless, ) Tj 175.2 0 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw (indications are tha) Tj 72.96 0 TD 0.1 Tc -0.2 Tw (t ) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0036 Tc -0.1036 Tw (no single test or ) Tj -257.28 -23.04 TD -0.0156 Tc 0.3956 Tw (procedure ) Tj 42.24 0 TD -0.0071 Tc 0 Tw (produce) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.0969 Tw ( acceptable results on a sensitivity/specificity basis) Tj 203.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0644 Tc -0.1644 Tw (in our work) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -336.96 -22.56 TD -0.068 Tc 0.288 Tw (sensitivity did not eve) Tj 87.84 0 TD 0.019 Tc -0.119 Tw (r reach 50% with any of the) Tj 110.88 0 TD 0.0314 Tc -0.0354 Tw ( screeners listed above including ) Tj -198.72 -23.52 TD -0.034 Tc -0.546 Tw (SCAN; ) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0206 Tc 0.1994 Tw (Domitz & Schow, 2000\)) Tj 98.88 0 TD -0.0213 Tc -0.0787 Tw (, and, as stated in ) Tj 70.56 0 TD 0.0867 Tc -0.1867 Tw (the ) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.084 Tc 0.296 Tw (ASHA \(2005\)) Tj 56.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.205 Tc 0 Tw (Po) Tj 11.52 0 TD 0.0487 Tc -0.3887 Tw (sition Statement ) Tj -287.04 -22.56 TD -0.0063 Tc -0.0937 Tw (on \(C\)APD) Tj 45.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0043 Tc -0.1043 Tw (completely separating sensory modalities ) Tj 167.52 0 TD 0.265 Tc 0.115 Tw (is ) Tj 9.6 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\223) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.022 Tc -0.078 Tw (neurophysiologically ) Tj -231.84 -23.52 TD -0.0242 Tc -0.0758 Tw (untenable\224 \(p) Tj 54.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.09 Tc -0.01 Tw ( 4\).) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -44.16 -22.56 TD 0.009 Tc -0.069 Tw (It is the present authors' view that one cannot adequately screen without ) Tj -30.24 -23.04 TD -0.019 Tc -0.001 Tw (addressing each of the ASHA auditory ) Tj 156.96 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (test ) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.0373 Tc -0.3027 Tw (domains that ) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0.0091 Tc -0.1091 Tw (have accepte) Tj 51.84 0 TD 0.0021 Tc 0.0579 Tw (d, commonly used ) Tj -278.88 -23.04 TD -0.0129 Tc -0.0871 Tw (methods for testing) Tj 76.8 0 TD 0.022 Tc -0.122 Tw (, which therefore ) Tj 71.04 0 TD -0.0663 Tc 0 Tw (requires) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0865 Tc -0.1865 Tw ( a screening battery) Tj 78.24 0 TD 0.38 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0032 Tc -0.1032 Tw (This was reinforced by ) Tj -265.44 -23.04 TD 0.0395 Tc -0.1395 Tw (Chermak \(1996\) who said) Tj 104.16 0 TD 0.0028 Tc -0.1028 Tw ( in speaking of diagnostic testing) Tj 132 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw ( \223) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw (. . . ) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.0035 Tc -0.1035 Tw (given the complexity of ) Tj -258.24 -23.04 TD 0.0258 Tc -0.1258 Tw (the central auditory nervous system, it is unlikely that an) Tj 227.04 0 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (y one behavioral test can be ) Tj -227.04 -23.04 TD -0.0093 Tc 0.0293 Tw (considered the definitive test of central auditory function. Hence, a comprehensive ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0478 Tc 0 Tw (pediatric) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.0103 Tc -0.0303 Tw ( central auditory evaluation requires a ) Tj 153.6 0 TD 0.0257 Tc -0.1257 Tw (battery of tests) Tj 59.04 0 TD 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw ( . . .) Tj 14.88 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw (\224 ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (\(p. 211\). ) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (For these ) Tj -308.64 -23.04 TD 0.0387 Tc -0.1388 Tw (same reas) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0.093 Tc -0.193 Tw (ons we think) Tj 51.36 0 TD -0.0143 Tc 0.0343 Tw ( screening requires a batte) Tj 104.16 0 TD 0.07 Tc -0.17 Tw (ry. ) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.0344 Tc -0.0544 Tw (Use of a battery runs somewhat ) Tj -210.24 -22.56 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.0776 Tw (counter to the definition of screening in terms of ease and time of administration) Tj 321.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.008 Tc 0.052 Tw ( but we ) Tj -324 -23.52 TD 0.0144 Tc -0.1144 Tw (suggest it is justified and necessary in this case. ) Tj 195.36 0 TD 0.05 Tc -0.15 Tw ( B) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw (ased on the Bruton Conference ) Tj 125.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0883 Tc -0.1883 Tw (Jerger ) Tj ET endstream endobj 49 0 obj 7822 endobj 47 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 30 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 48 0 R >> endobj 52 0 obj << /Length 53 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (13) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (13) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.0177 Tc -0.2777 Tw (& Musiek, 2000\) ) Tj 71.04 0 TD 0.0433 Tc -0.1433 Tw (and relevant discuss) Tj 80.64 0 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0933 Tw (ions following that conference) Tj 121.44 0 TD 0.18 Tc -0.28 Tw (, w) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.0289 Tc 0.1111 Tw (e conclude ) Tj 45.6 0 TD 0.034 Tc 0.346 Tw (there ) Tj -331.2 -22.56 TD -0.0064 Tc -0.0936 Tw (is evidence that ) Tj 64.32 0 TD 0.034 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0125 Tc -0.0875 Tw (commonly used) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1275 Tc -0.2275 Tw (test ) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.0414 Tc -0.0586 Tw (domains ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.062 Tc -0.642 Tw (exist ) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.0678 Tc -0.1678 Tw (for \(C\)APD ) Tj 50.4 0 TD -0.008 Tc -0.092 Tw (and that all ) Tj 46.56 0 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -344.16 -23.04 TD -0.1467 Tc 0.0467 Tw (can ) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.0722 Tc -0.1722 Tw (and should ) Tj 46.56 0 TD -0.0207 Tc 0.2407 Tw (be measured using ) Tj 76.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1007 Tw (behavioral tests) Tj 62.4 0 TD 0.1329 Tc -0.2329 Tw ( \(Chermak, 2001\)) Tj 71.52 0 TD -0.0264 Tc -0.0736 Tw (. These three) Tj 53.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.115 Tc -0.215 Tw ( with ) Tj -328.8 -23.04 TD -0.0258 Tc -0.0742 Tw (recommended acronyms) Tj 97.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.07 Tc -0.03 Tw ( are) Tj 14.4 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0.16 Tw ( \(a\) ) Tj 16.32 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.195 Tc 0 Tw (audi) Tj 19.2 0 TD -0.0427 Tc 0.4227 Tw (tory pattern) Tj 51.84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0 Tc -0.58 Tw (temporal ) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0.0325 Tc 0 Tw (ordering) Tj 37.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1675 Tc (APTO) Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw ( tests) Tj 21.12 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.0533 Tw (\(b\) ) Tj -344.16 -23.04 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0117 Tc -0.1117 Tw (monaural separation) Tj 88.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.1129 Tc 0 Tw (closure) Tj 30.72 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.16 Tc 0 Tw (MSC) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.205 Tc -0.305 Tw (\), ) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.12 Tc (c) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 6.24 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.095 Tc 0 Tw (binaural) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0.0273 Tc -0.1273 Tw ( integration) Tj 49.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (/) Tj 3.36 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.085 Tc -0.495 Tw (binaural ) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.06 Tc 0 Tw (separation) Tj 45.6 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -344.64 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.2025 Tc (BIBS) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw ( tests) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.048 Tc 0.14 Tw (ee "Auditory Domain" in Table ) Tj 127.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.515 Tc (\).) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.085 Tc -0.015 Tw ( ASHA ) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0.0481 Tc -0.1481 Tw (\(2005\) identified) Tj 67.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0256 Tc 0.1144 Tw (four other ) Tj -311.04 -23.04 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (test ) Tj 16.32 0 TD 0.0217 Tc -0.1217 Tw (areas \() Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.032 Tc -0.132 Tw (i.e., ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.0557 Tc 0 Tw (discrimination) Tj 58.08 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw ( tests) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.15 Tc 0.05 Tw (, b) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.01 Tc 0 Tw (inaural) Tj 27.84 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0391 Tc 0 Tw (interaction) Tj 42.72 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw ( tests) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.0308 Tc -0.1308 Tw (, electroacoustical tests, ) Tj -241.44 -23.04 TD -0.0079 Tc 0.045 Tw (electrophysiologic tests\), but there are very few data) Tj 209.28 0 TD 0.0346 Tc -0.1346 Tw ( to indicate the utility of screen) Tj 124.32 0 TD 0.016 Tc -0.116 Tw (ing in ) Tj -333.6 -23.04 TD -0.029 Tc -0.071 Tw (these areas) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0922 Tc 0.2322 Tw ( for \(C\)APD) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.0309 Tc -0.1309 Tw (, nor are there tools available in many of these areas that could be ) Tj -93.12 -22.56 TD -0.0414 Tc -0.0586 Tw (used in m) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.11 Tc 0 Tw (ost) Tj 12 0 TD -0.076 Tc -0.024 Tw ( scree) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.0467 Tc -0.1467 Tw (ning settings, including the schools.) Tj 144 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD ( ) Tj -192 -23.52 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (T) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.018 Tc 0.122 Tw (his chapter ) Tj 46.08 0 TD -0.0018 Tc -0.0982 Tw (is organized ) Tj 50.88 0 TD 0.07 Tc 0.07 Tw (to address ) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0733 Tc 0 Tw (the) Tj 12 0 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.0169 Tw ( three generally accepted areas of ) Tj -188.16 -22.56 TD -0.0909 Tc 0 Tw (measurement) Tj 53.28 0 TD -0.0483 Tc -0.0517 Tw ( \(i.e., ) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.0286 Tc -0.0714 Tw (APTO, MSC, and BIBS tests) Tj 116.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.0533 Tw ( If and when there are data to support ) Tj -201.12 -23.52 TD 0.0138 Tc -0.1138 Tw (additional areas, the same general strategy can be used) Tj 218.4 0 TD 0.0156 Tc 0.0444 Tw ( to involve ) Tj 45.12 0 TD 0.275 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.038 Tc -0.138 Tw (five, ) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.0667 Tc -0.0067 Tw ( or more ) Tj -305.76 -22.56 TD -0.0093 Tc -0.0907 Tw (areas of concern.) Tj 67.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0269 Tc -0.0069 Tw ( Below we summarize ) Tj 91.68 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.0064 Tc 0 Tw (representative) Tj 57.6 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0112 Tc 0.0312 Tw ( behavioral instruments based ) Tj -219.84 -23.04 TD 0.0209 Tc -0.1209 Tw (upon this categorization.) Tj 98.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0089 Tc -0.0489 Tw (Much of the material reported below in this ) Tj 176.64 0 TD 0.034 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0871 Tc -0.0129 Tw (pronged ) Tj -303.84 -23.04 TD -0 Tc 0.0373 Tw (approach was developed from an initial recommendation by) Tj 240 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw ( Musiek ) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.022 Tc -0.078 Tw (and Chermak ) Tj -275.04 -23.04 TD -0.0225 Tc 0 Tw (\(199) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0197 Tc 0.0797 Tw (. They based their recommendations on the relationship between behavioral tests ) Tj -26.88 -23.04 TD 0.0065 Tc 0.1335 Tw (and known pathophysiology) Tj 113.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0211 Tc -0.0678 Tw (although they also state that, in children, \(C\)APD is ) Tj -118.08 -23.04 TD -0.0257 Tc 0.1057 Tw (\223usually a benign medical condition\224 \(p. 24\), The) Tj 200.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.275 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.2475 Tc -0.3475 Tw ( test) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0567 Tc -0.0433 Tw ( sugges) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.028 Tc -0.072 Tw (ted by ) Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.0222 Tc -0.1222 Tw (Musiek and ) Tj -297.12 -23.04 TD -0.0257 Tc -0.0743 Tw (Chermak ) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0.0131 Tc -0.1131 Tw (were focused on the ) Tj 82.56 0 TD 0.034 Tc -0.134 Tw (three ) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.0009 Tc 0.0191 Tw (areas of measurement mentioned above) Tj 158.4 0 TD 0.026 Tc -0.126 Tw (, and formed ) Tj -302.4 -23.04 TD 0.0114 Tc -0.1114 Tw (the basis of MAPA) Tj 76.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0194 Tc -0.1194 Tw (Using this framework) Tj 87.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0.27 Tw ( we have ) Tj 37.92 0 TD -0.0225 Tc -0.0775 Tw (used ) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.018 Tc -0.562 Tw (their ) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.275 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0281 Tc -0.1281 Tw (recommended tests ) Tj -272.64 -22.56 TD -0.0117 Tc 0.0077 Tw (to develop normative data. ) Tj 111.84 0 TD -0.2233 Tc 0.1233 Tw (The ) Tj 17.28 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\223) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.03 Tc (outliers) Tj 30.72 0 TD -0.12 Tc (\224) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.0067 Tc 0.0987 Tw ( from the normative data \(i.e) Tj 114.24 0 TD 0.0071 Tc -0.1071 Tw (., those falling ) Tj 59.52 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0.1 Tw (2 ) Tj -342.24 -23.52 TD 0.0314 Tc 0.3486 Tw (SD below) Tj 39.84 0 TD -0.018 Tc 0.0551 Tw ( the mean\) are identified as having \(C\)APD) Tj 173.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0215 Tc -0.1215 Tw (i.e., our quasi) Tj 54.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.045 Tc -0.535 Tw (behavioral ) Tj 44.16 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.235 Tc 0.145 Tw (gold ) Tj ET endstream endobj 53 0 obj 9100 endobj 50 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 52 0 R >> endobj 55 0 obj << /Length 56 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (14) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (14) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.005 Tc (standard) Tj 36 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0114 Tc -0.0516 Tw (. In short, this strategy has been used in a preliminary way ) Tj 237.12 0 TD 0.0137 Tc -0.1137 Tw (to define children ) Tj -276.48 -22.56 TD 0 Tc -0.0469 Tw (with \(C\)APD in an effort to develop a behavioral ) Tj 198.72 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.115 Tc -0.215 Tw (gold standard) Tj 57.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0559 Tc -0.0441 Tw (. This work involved ) Tj 84.48 0 TD 0.36 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj -340.32 -23.04 TD 0.0045 Tc -0.1045 Tw (series of studies using) Tj 87.84 0 TD 0.0176 Tc -0.1176 Tw ( factor analysis and careful test design strateg) Tj 181.92 0 TD -0.0233 Tc 0 Tw (ies) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.51 Tc -0.37 Tw ( \() Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.0791 Tc -0.1791 Tw (Conlin 2003;) Tj 52.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -342.24 -23.04 TD -0.0024 Tc -0.0291 Tw (Domitz & Schow, 2000; Schow, et al., 2000) Tj 177.12 0 TD 0.108 Tc -0.208 Tw (, 2006) Tj 25.44 0 TD -0.38 Tc -0.2 Tw (; ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0011 Tc -0.2211 Tw (Schow & Chermak, 1999; ) Tj 107.04 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (Shiffman, ) Tj -314.4 -23.04 TD 0.0539 Tc -0.1539 Tw (1999; Summers, 2003\)) Tj 91.68 0 TD -0.0233 Tc 0.0605 Tw (. In this process the Multiple Auditory) Tj 155.04 0 TD -0.0155 Tc -0.0845 Tw ( Processing Assessment ) Tj -246.72 -23.04 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (\(MAPA\)) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.0527 Tc -0.1527 Tw ( test battery ) Tj 49.44 0 TD 0.0392 Tc -0.1392 Tw (was developed) Tj 59.04 0 TD -0.0783 Tc 0.1383 Tw (. Using ) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0.0671 Tc -0.1671 Tw (one test ) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0289 Tc -0.0689 Tw (or one from the same domain in the ) Tj -214.08 -23.04 TD -0.0351 Tc 0.2094 Tw (case of the Selective Auditory Attention Test ) Tj 182.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw ([) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.064 Tc (SAAT]) Tj 29.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0054 Tc 0.3746 Tw (recommended by) Tj 68.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0311 Tc -0.0689 Tw (Musiek and ) Tj -293.28 -23.04 TD 0.0429 Tc 0 Tw (Chermak) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0.1967 Tc -0.2967 Tw ( \(1994\)) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.0438 Tc -0.1762 Tw ( in each of ) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.034 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 20.16 0 TD -0.0414 Tc -0.0586 Tw ( domains) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0117 Tc -0.1117 Tw (SAAT, Pitch Patterns) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw ([) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.2 Tc (PP) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc (]) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0033 Tc -0.1033 Tw (, Dichotic Digits) Tj 66.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -345.12 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw ([) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.02 Tc (DD) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc (]) Tj 2.88 0 TD (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0291 Tc -0.1291 Tw (and comparing these to the ) Tj 110.4 0 TD 0.035 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw ( test ) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.051 Tc -0.151 Tw (behavioral ) Tj 45.12 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.115 Tc 0.265 Tw (gold ) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.125 Tc 0 Tw (standard) Tj 35.52 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0207 Tc 0.0807 Tw ( \(which included ) Tj -273.6 -22.56 TD -0.0103 Tc -0.0212 Tw (Competing Sentences in addition to the SAAT, PP) Tj 202.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0717 Tc -0.1717 Tw ( and DD\)) Tj 36.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0525 Tc -0.1525 Tw (we were able to) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0.0922 Tc 0.1278 Tw ( obtain 90% ) Tj -310.08 -23.52 TD 0.1018 Tc 0 Tw (sensitivity) Tj 40.8 0 TD -0.0292 Tc 0.0892 Tw (. In contrast, ) Tj 52.32 0 TD 0.0922 Tc -0.1922 Tw (when using) Tj 46.08 0 TD -0.0014 Tc -0.0986 Tw ( one test) Tj 33.12 0 TD -0.012 Tc -0.088 Tw ( alone) Tj 24.48 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.002 Tc -0.098 Tw ( we obtained) Tj 51.36 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( no b) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.0767 Tc -0.0167 Tw (etter than 40% ) Tj -270.24 -22.56 TD 0.1018 Tc 0 Tw (sensitivity) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (obtained ) Tj 36.96 0 TD -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw (with ) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.0867 Tc -0.1867 Tw (the ) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.0475 Tc 0 Tw (SAAT) Tj 25.92 0 TD -0.515 Tc (\),) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0343 Tc -0.0657 Tw (with sensitivity of 30% obtained with the ) Tj 168 0 TD -0.28 Tc 0 Tw (PP) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1467 Tc 0.2333 Tw (and ) Tj -334.08 -23.52 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (30% with the ) Tj 55.68 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (DD) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0194 Tc 0.094 Tw (\(Domitz & Schow, 2000\). Inasmuch as \(C\)APD was here defined in ) Tj -72.48 -22.56 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (terms of these four ) Tj 77.76 0 TD -0.234 Tc 0 Tw (neuro) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (biologically anchored ) Tj 89.28 0 TD 0.003 Tc -0.583 Tw (behavioral ) Tj 44.64 0 TD 0.092 Tc 0 Tw (tests) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.0182 Tc -0.1182 Tw (, specificit) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0.0078 Tc -0.1078 Tw (y was in all ) Tj -294.24 -23.04 TD 0.107 Tc -0.207 Tw (cases 100%.) Tj 49.92 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf ( ) Tj -22.08 -23.04 TD -0.1025 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0275 Tc -0.1275 Tw ( the conclusions here are based on) Tj 136.32 0 TD 0.0471 Tc 0.0129 Tw ( the behavioral test) Tj 75.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0086 Tc -0.1086 Tw (sensitivity and ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD 0.0964 Tc 0 Tw (specificity) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0.05 Tc -0.05 Tw ( of our work) Tj 49.92 0 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.1929 Tw ( and on a behavioral ) Tj 83.52 0 TD 0.002 Tc -0.582 Tw (quasi ) Tj 23.52 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw (gold standard) Tj 56.64 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0312 Tc -0.0688 Tw (, we would argue that ) Tj -254.88 -23.04 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw (these findings) Tj 55.68 0 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.0323 Tw ( underscore the need for a battery approach) Tj 172.8 0 TD 0.0383 Tc 0.1817 Tw ( and are ) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0.0085 Tc -0.1085 Tw (defensible as a measure ) Tj -263.04 -23.04 TD 0.0475 Tc -0.1475 Tw (of diagnostic accuracy) Tj 89.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0012 Tc -0.0115 Tw ( We simply have to start somewhere and although a behavioral ) Tj -95.04 -23.04 TD -0.0029 Tc -0.0971 Tw (standard involves some assumptions) Tj 145.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0326 Tc -0.1326 Tw ( we think it is a reasonable approach and is similar ) Tj -147.84 -23.04 TD 0.0103 Tc -0.1103 Tw (to the approach used in language disorders. ) Tj 178.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (Swets \(1988) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( h) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (as written some of the key ) Tj -238.56 -22.56 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (articles on diagnostic accu) Tj 105.6 0 TD -0.0054 Tc -0.0146 Tw (racy and the gold standard. H) Tj 120 0 TD 0.0291 Tc -0.1291 Tw (e explains that different ) Tj -225.6 -23.52 TD 0.0144 Tc -0.0344 Tw (diagnostic fields may use a variety of) Tj 149.28 0 TD 0.0419 Tc -0.0459 Tw ( approaches and all have certain) Tj 128.16 0 TD -0.05 Tc -0.05 Tw ( limitations) Tj 45.12 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.044 Tc -0.056 Tw (but by ) Tj ET endstream endobj 56 0 obj 7726 endobj 54 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 55 0 R >> endobj 58 0 obj << /Length 59 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (15) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (15) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0041 Tc 0.1441 Tw (using the fundamental principles \(sensitivity and speci) Tj 217.44 0 TD 0.1036 Tc -0.2036 Tw (ficity data\)) Tj 43.68 0 TD -0.0219 Tc 0.0419 Tw ( scientists in each field) Tj 91.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -352.32 -22.56 TD 0.0081 Tc -0.1881 Tw (can work together \(not in isolation\) ) Tj 143.52 0 TD 0.0108 Tc 0.0264 Tw (on defining the standards and test strategies ) Tj 177.12 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\223) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. . . ) Tj -342.24 -23.04 TD -0.023 Tc (contribute) Tj 40.32 0 TD 0.115 Tc -0.215 Tw ( mutually) Tj 37.92 0 TD 0.032 Tc -0.132 Tw ( to the) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.065 Tc 0 Tw (ir) Tj 6.24 0 TD -0.021 Tc 0.161 Tw ( general ref) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0771 Tc 0 Tw (inement) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.12 Tc (\224) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.17 Tc -0.27 Tw ( \(p. 1291\)) Tj 39.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.015 Tc -0.085 Tw (More ) Tj 24.48 0 TD -0.0271 Tc 0.4071 Tw (details ) Tj 28.32 0 TD -0.045 Tc -0.055 Tw (about the ) Tj -293.76 -23.04 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (battery ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.39 Tc 0 Tw (are) Tj 12 0 TD 0.0312 Tc -0.1312 Tw ( summarized below.) Tj 81.12 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw ( Because ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.0029 Tc -0.1029 Tw (of the importance of ) Tj 83.52 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0286 Tc -0.0714 Tw (factor analysis) Tj 61.92 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0683 Tc -0.1683 Tw ( in test ) Tj -309.6 -23.04 TD 0.0067 Tc 0.0133 Tw (design nearly all the ) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0.005 Tc -0.105 Tw (representative ) Tj 58.56 0 TD 0.001 Tc -0.021 Tw (tests described below and in Table 6) Tj 145.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0408 Tc -0.1408 Tw (2 have at least ) Tj -290.4 -23.04 TD -0.0138 Tc -0.3262 Tw (one study ) Tj 40.8 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (that) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.0015 Tc -0.0985 Tw ( supports the factor grouping.) Tj 117.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -173.76 -23.04 TD 0.0131 Tc -0.0597 Tw (\(PLACE FOOTNOTE FROM P. 17 NEAR BOLDED FACTOR ANALYSIS ABOVE\)) Tj 351.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -351.36 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.215 Tc 0.355 Tw (APTO: \(Au) Tj 48.96 0 TD -0.015 Tc 0.075 Tw (ditory Pattern Temporal Ordering\)) Tj 137.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -174.72 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.026 Tc 0.034 Tw (MAPA Pitch Pattern Test) Tj 102.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -132 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1055 Tc 0.4855 Tw (MAPA TAP Test) Tj 69.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -99.36 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.009 Tc -0.091 Tw (MAPA Duration Patterns) Tj 101.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -131.04 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0225 Tc -0.0775 Tw (MAPA ) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.1817 Tc 0 Tw (Fusion) Tj 27.84 0 TD -0.105 Tc 0.005 Tw ( Test ) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -140.64 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0418 Tc 0.2298 Tw (/MAPA Pitch Pattern Test. ) Tj 112.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -127.68 -22.56 TD 0.0046 Tc -0.1046 Tw (This test was modeled after the ) Tj 126.72 0 TD 0.11 Tc 0 Tw (Frequency) Tj 42.72 0 TD -0.0075 Tc -0.0925 Tw ( Patterns) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.28 Tc (FP) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 6.24 0 TD 0.135 Tc 0 Tw (Test) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0212 Tc -0.1212 Tw (\(Musiek & ) Tj 46.08 0 TD 0.052 Tc 0 Tw (Pinhe) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.1 Tc (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.154 Tc -0.254 Tw (ro, 19) Tj 24 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (8) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.09 Tc -0.01 Tw (7\). ) Tj -349.44 -23.52 TD -0.0633 Tc -0.0367 Tw (The ) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.0033 Tc 0.1433 Tw (FP Test ) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.0188 Tc 0.3987 Tw (reflects ) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0092 Tc 0.3708 Tw (the ASHA \(1996) Tj 68.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0013 Tc -0.1013 Tw ( 2005\) temporal component of auditory pattern ) Tj -154.08 -22.56 TD 0.0196 Tc -0.0914 Tw (recognition, and has been a staple for screening in \(C\)APD. The test consists of 120 test ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0075 Tc -0.0925 Tw (sequences, each made of ) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.0009 Tc -0.0305 Tw ( tones. Two of the tones are the same and one varies, and ) Tj -121.44 -23.04 TD -0.0115 Tc -0.0885 Tw (the subject is r) Tj 57.6 0 TD 0.0043 Tc 0.0065 Tw (equired to declare the pattern to the tester \(verbally, by humming, or by ) Tj -57.6 -23.04 TD 0.012 Tc -0.112 Tw (pointing to a visual analog\). ) Tj 116.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -116.64 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (The MAPA ) Tj 48.96 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0185 Tc 0.1215 Tw (Pitch Patterns ) Tj 63.84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0318 Tc -0.0682 Tw (Test \(Schow, ) Tj 54.72 0 TD 0.0078 Tc 0.1322 Tw (Chermak, Seikel, Brockett) Tj 106.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.051 Tc -0.151 Tw ( & Whitaker, ) Tj -306.24 -23.04 TD 0.0222 Tc -0.1222 Tw (2006\) is derived from Pinhe) Tj 111.84 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.084 Tc -0.184 Tw (ro \(19) Tj 24.48 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (7) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0045 Tc -0.0359 Tw (7\). This test introduces high and low) Tj 148.32 0 TD -0.07 Tc 0.21 Tw ( pitches ) Tj -292.8 -23.04 TD -0.023 Tc -0.077 Tw (binaurally ) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0.0571 Tc -0.1571 Tw (in a four) Tj 34.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0132 Tc 0.0441 Tw (tone series, and the subject identifies the pattern by verbalizing \(e.g., ) Tj ET endstream endobj 59 0 obj 6342 endobj 57 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R /F4 60 0 R /F5 62 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 58 0 R >> endobj 65 0 obj << /Length 66 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (16) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (16) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.2 Tc (h) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc (igh) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (h) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.06 Tc (igh) Tj 13.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1 Tc (l) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.37 Tc (ow) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (h) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.045 Tc 0.015 Tw (igh\). The four) Tj 58.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0197 Tc -0.1197 Tw (tone sequence was used instead of Pinhe) Tj 162.72 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0317 Tc -0.1317 Tw (ro\222s original ) Tj -291.84 -22.56 TD -0.062 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0023 Tc -0.0444 Tw (tone sequence because of a ceiling effect identified by Shiff) Tj 239.52 0 TD -0.06 Tc 0.12 Tw (man \(1999\) and ) Tj -262.56 -23.04 TD -0.013 Tc 0 Tw (Neijenhuis) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0152 Tc 0.0952 Tw (, Snik, Priester, van Kordenoordt, and van den Broek) Tj 212.16 0 TD 0.1967 Tc 0.1833 Tw ( \(2000\)) Tj 29.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw (A four) Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (tone ) Tj -321.6 -23.04 TD 0.01 Tc 0.37 Tw (pattern ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0063 Tc -0.1063 Tw (avoids the ceiling effect observed using the three) Tj 195.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0023 Tc -0.1023 Tw (tone pattern and results in the ) Tj -229.44 -23.04 TD 0.0041 Tc -0.1041 Tw (same factor structure as the three) Tj 131.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.068 Tc 0.312 Tw (tone p) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.013 Tc 0.033 Tw (attern test. Nonetheless, ) Tj 100.32 0 TD 0.0363 Tc -0.0163 Tw (the additional tone is ) Tj -260.16 -23.04 TD -0.0203 Tc 0.0803 Tw (likely to exert greater demands on memory) Tj 171.84 0 TD 0.014 Tc -0.114 Tw ( and reversals are ) Tj 72 0 TD 0.1147 Tc -0.2147 Tw (scored correctly) Tj 64.8 0 TD 0.015 Tc 0.005 Tw ( to avoid a ) Tj -308.64 -23.04 TD 0.0036 Tc -0.1036 Tw (floor effect) Tj 44.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0102 Tc -0.0229 Tw (Summers \(2003\) tested 119 children using the entire MAPA battery, and ) Tj -49.44 -23.04 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (results were subjected to factor a) Tj 131.04 0 TD -0.005 Tc 0.385 Tw (nalysis. ) Tj 36 0 TD -0.0177 Tc -0.2023 Tw (This test loaded strongly ) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.5825 Tw (.74\) ) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.0567 Tc 0.1167 Tw (to the APTO ) Tj -294.24 -23.04 TD -0.0388 Tc 0 Tw (domain\).) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -35.52 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0331 Tc 0.1731 Tw (/MAPA Tap Test \(Schow et al., 2006\)) Tj 152.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -168 -22.56 TD -0.0051 Tc -0.0469 Tw (The MAPA Tap Test was developed upon the suggestion of ) Tj 241.92 0 TD 0.0243 Tc 0.3557 Tw (Charles ) Tj 33.12 0 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0933 Tw (Berlin ) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.056 Tc -0.156 Tw (who has used ) Tj -302.4 -23.52 TD -0.0093 Tc -0.0373 Tw (it clinically for years and found it extremely useful ) Tj 205.44 0 TD -0 Tc -0.0993 Tw (\(personal commu) Tj 69.6 0 TD 0.1125 Tc 0 Tw (nication) Tj 32.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.31 Tc 0.45 Tw (. It) Tj 13.44 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw ( is ) Tj -324.48 -22.56 TD -0.0533 Tc 0 Tw (purported) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.0204 Tc -0.0671 Tw ( to test temporal resolving dimensions of the auditory system) Tj 244.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0458 Tc 0.0462 Tw ( In this test, a ) Tj -287.52 -23.04 TD 0.0269 Tc -0.1269 Tw (series of tapping sounds is presented with an interval of 120 ms between taps.) Tj 311.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0344 Tc -0.0656 Tw (\(Although ) Tj -315.84 -23.04 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.1106 Tw (the interstimulus interval is large in the context of tempo) Tj 227.04 0 TD 0.0055 Tc -0.1055 Tw (ral resolution, and may therefore ) Tj -227.04 -23.04 TD -0.0027 Tc -0.0073 Tw (burden working memory, the Tap Test factors strongly with at least one other test in the ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0045 Tc -0.0955 Tw (APTO domain.) Tj 60.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0018 Tc -0.1018 Tw (Three series of taps) Tj 78.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0096 Tc -0.1096 Tw (are presented to the listener.) Tj 112.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0261 Tc 0.0659 Tw ( After each series the ) Tj -262.08 -23.04 TD -0.0065 Tc -0.0249 Tw (listener must indicate the number of taps he) Tj 174.24 0 TD 0.0225 Tc 0 Tw (ard.) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0031 Tc -0.0431 Tw ( The total number of test taps is ) Tj 128.64 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (30) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.0433 Tc 0.0967 Tw (, so ) Tj -331.68 -23.04 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (that a raw score is based on the sum of the subject's estimate of number of taps.) Tj 317.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0914 Tc -0.0086 Tw ( The test ) Tj -320.16 -23.04 TD 0.0037 Tc -0.1037 Tw (proved surprisingly sensitive to \(C\)APD, loading ) Tj 198.72 0 TD -0.105 Tc 0 Tw (firm) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.67 Tc (ly) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0295 Tc 0.1215 Tw (.50\) on the APTO domain ) Tj -234.72 -22.56 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (Summers, 2003) Tj 62.88 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\). ) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.0333 Tc -0.1333 Tw (\(Factor lo) Tj 39.36 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.07 Tc -0.17 Tw (dings on) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.0212 Tc 0.0412 Tw ( TAP were even larger) Tj 90.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.065 Tc 0 Tw (i.e.) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.38 Tc (, ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.1667 Tc (.75) Tj 12.48 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0075 Tc -0.0925 Tw ( when Duration ) Tj -285.12 -23.52 TD -0.0193 Tc 0.1593 Tw (Patterns and AFT) Tj 70.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0322 Tc -0.1322 Tw (R were included in the ) Tj 93.12 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw (tests ) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.1933 Tc 0 Tw (factor) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.32 Tc (ed) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD /F0 9.2 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 66 0 obj 6754 endobj 64 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 65 0 R >> endobj 68 0 obj << /Length 69 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (17) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (17) Tj -349.92 559.2 TD /F0 9.2 Tf -0.0497 Tc 0.2137 Tw (/FN/AUTHOR: Please add asterisk in text to show which page this note should appear on. ) Tj 0 -21.12 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (*) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.027 Tc 0.127 Tw (Factor analysis was reported in the development of the SCAN \(Ke) Tj 243.84 0 TD -0.0159 Tc 0.1159 Tw (ith, 19) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (86) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.0743 Tc 0.0543 Tw (\) and in the ) Tj -280.32 -20.64 TD -0.0231 Tc 0.1231 Tw (development of a Dutch \(C\)APD battery of tests \(Neijenhuis et al) Tj 240 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0278 Tc 0.0318 Tw (, 2000\). The obvious advantage ) Tj -242.4 -21.6 TD -0.0299 Tc 0.1299 Tw (of Factor Analysis is that the power of this statistical procedure allows many tests to be grouped ) Tj 0 -21.12 TD -0.036 Tc 0.136 Tw (in terms of the underlying factor which) Tj 143.04 0 TD -0.0151 Tc 0.1151 Tw ( is being measured and similar tests can be grouped ) Tj -143.04 -21.12 TD -0.0266 Tc 0.0581 Tw (together. Through a series of five major studies, a strong, consistent, underlying factor structure ) Tj 0 -20.64 TD -0.0411 Tc 0.1145 Tw (has emerged supporting each of the tests used for the three domains, although in some tests a few ) Tj 0 -21.12 TD -0.0758 Tc -0.3042 Tw (minor ) Tj 24 0 TD -0.0454 Tc 0.1454 Tw (factors were found. In the development of MAPA, both exploratory and confirmatory ) Tj -24 -21.6 TD -0.0388 Tc 0.1388 Tw (procedures were used that makes the test development even stronger \(Keith, 1986; Neijenhuis et ) Tj 0 -20.64 TD -0.037 Tc 0.137 Tw (al., 2000; Schow et al., 2000) Tj 104.64 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.1206 Tc 0.2206 Tw ( 2006\).) Tj 25.92 0 TD 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -132.96 -22.08 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0434 Tc 0.1834 Tw (/MAPA Durations Pattern Test \(Schow,) Tj 158.88 0 TD 0.04 Tc 0.02 Tw ( et al., 20) Tj 37.44 0 TD -0.1175 Tc 0 Tw (06\).) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -227.52 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (This is based on the Musiek) Tj 111.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.23 Tc -0.33 Tw (et al) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.28 Tc (1990) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.062 Tc -0.038 Tw ( three) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.015 Tc 0.365 Tw (tone ) Tj 19.68 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.028 Tc -0.128 Tw (Duration Pattern) Tj 73.92 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0075 Tc 0 Tw (test) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0033 Tc -0.1033 Tw ( but in this ) Tj -304.8 -23.04 TD -0.026 Tc -0.074 Tw (case g) Tj 24.48 0 TD 0.0243 Tc -0.1243 Tw (roups of ) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.035 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0097 Tc -0.0697 Tw (tone series are presented binaurally to the subject. Duration of the ) Tj -80.16 -22.56 TD 0.0035 Tc -0.0555 Tw (tones is randomly varied between short and long. The subject) Tj 248.16 0 TD 0.0054 Tc -0.1054 Tw (\222s task is to verbally report ) Tj -248.16 -23.52 TD 0.0258 Tc -0.1258 Tw (the series in the order that the tones were presented \(e.g., \223long) Tj 252 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.032 Tc (short) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.235 Tc (long) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0386 Tc -0.1386 Tw (long\224\). ) Tj -299.52 -22.56 TD -0.0022 Tc -0.0178 Tw (Summers \(2003\) reported only a modest ) Tj 163.68 0 TD -0.0343 Tc 0 Tw (loading) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.0114 Tc 0.0714 Tw ( on APTO \() Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.05 Tw (36\) based on 119 subjects. ) Tj -242.88 -23.52 TD -0.0119 Tc 0.0319 Tw (Accordingly, the Pitch Pattern and Tap Test were selecte) Tj 227.04 0 TD 0.0168 Tc 0.0432 Tw (d in the MAPA battery to ) Tj -227.04 -22.56 TD 0.0011 Tc 0.0097 Tw (measure the temporal domain because of their more favorable factor loading compared to ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0068 Tc -0.0932 Tw (Duration Patterns and ) Tj 89.28 0 TD 0.0467 Tc -0.1467 Tw (Gap ) Tj 19.2 0 TD 0.038 Tc 0 Tw (Detection.) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -150.24 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.094 Tc -0.486 Tw (/MAPA ) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0.1017 Tc 0 Tw (Fusion) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.0514 Tw ( Test \(Schow, et al., 2006\). ) Tj 113.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -189.6 -23.52 TD -0.0633 Tc -0.0367 Tw (The ) Tj 17.76 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0607 Tc -0.1607 Tw (Auditory Fusion) Tj 70.08 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.015 Tc 0.365 Tw ( Test) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0771 Tc (Revised) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.51 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.0567 Tc 0 Tw (AFT) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.05 Tc (R) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0406 Tc -0.1406 Tw ( \(McCroskey & Keith) Tj 87.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.056 Tc -0.036 Tw ( 1996\) purports to ) Tj -271.68 -22.56 TD 0.0068 Tc -0.0668 Tw (examine the resolving capacity of the auditory nervous system of listeners. ) Tj 303.84 0 TD 0.0167 Tc -0.2767 Tw (It is actually ) Tj ET endstream endobj 69 0 obj 5692 endobj 67 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 68 0 R >> endobj 71 0 obj << /Length 72 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (18) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (18) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.0314 Tc -0.1314 Tw (a test of ) Tj 34.08 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0233 Tc 0.3567 Tw (temporal resolution) Tj 84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.076 Tc 0.136 Tw ( as are ) Tj 27.84 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0633 Tc 0.3167 Tw (gap detection) Tj 57.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw ( tests. ) Tj 28.32 0 TD -0.2233 Tc 0.1233 Tw (The ) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.2633 Tc 0 Tw (AFT) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0358 Tc -0.1358 Tw (R provides the ) Tj -273.6 -22.56 TD 0.016 Tc -0.116 Tw (listener with pairs of gated tonal stimuli that are separated ) Tj 234.24 0 TD -0.0392 Tc 0.4192 Tw (by millisecond) Tj 59.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0257 Tc -0.1257 Tw (level intervals ) Tj -296.64 -23.04 TD 0.0192 Tc -0.1192 Tw (of silence. Because the expected temporal resolution is 1) Tj 229.44 0 TD 0.19 Tc -0.05 Tw ( to ) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0.0188 Tc -0.0228 Tw (2 ms \(Green, 1973\), listeners ) Tj -242.4 -23.04 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (who fail to recognize the gaps at smaller intervals are ) Tj 215.52 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0857 Tc 0 Tw (assumed) Tj 35.52 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0265 Tc 0.0636 Tw ( to be at risk for \(C\)APD. ) Tj 103.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -354.72 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0324 Tc 0.0524 Tw (The RGDT is a revised version of the Audi) Tj 172.32 0 TD 0.0629 Tc -0.1629 Tw (tory Fusion Test) Tj 65.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1127 Tc -0.2127 Tw (Revised \(AFT) Tj 57.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (R\) ) Tj -331.68 -23.04 TD 0.007 Tc 0.013 Tw (\(McCroskey & Keith, 1996\). ) Tj 118.56 0 TD -0.0066 Tc -0.0454 Tw (Keith \(2001\) notes that the purpose of the Random Gap ) Tj -118.56 -23.04 TD -0.0084 Tc -0.023 Tw (Detection Test \(RGDT\) is to identify deficits related to temporal function of the auditory ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0018 Tc -0.1018 Tw (system as they relate to phonologic processing defi) Tj 204 0 TD -0.0197 Tc 0.1597 Tw (cits, auditory discrimination, receptive ) Tj -204 -23.04 TD -0.0045 Tc -0.0955 Tw (language, and reading. ) Tj 95.52 0 TD -0.012 Tc 0.072 Tw (Similar to the AFT) Tj 75.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.215 Tc -0.315 Tw (R, ) Tj 12 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.08 Tc -0.18 Tw (he ) Tj 12 0 TD 0.155 Tc 0 Tw (RGDT) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.02 Tc 0 Tw ( measures temporal resolution ) Tj -228 -22.56 TD 0.0016 Tc -0.058 Tw (through determination of the smallest time interval between two temporally proximate ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0116 Tc -0.0583 Tw (stimuli. The listener attends to a series of ) Tj 169.44 0 TD -0.005 Tc -0.035 Tw (paired stimuli as the silent interval between the ) Tj -169.44 -22.56 TD -0.0067 Tc 0.0133 Tw (pairs changes in duration. The task of the listener is to report whether the percept was of ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0043 Tc -0.1043 Tw (one or two tones.) Tj 68.64 0 TD 0.0102 Tc -0.0733 Tw ( See Chermak and Lee \(2005\) for a comparison of tests of temporal ) Tj -68.64 -22.56 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (resolution. ) Tj 45.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD ( ) Tj -49.92 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.0286 Tc -0.1286 Tw (The MAPA ) Tj 49.44 0 TD 0.066 Tc 0 Tw (Fusio) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc (n) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0755 Tc 0.1355 Tw ( Test \(Schow, ) Tj 57.12 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (et al., ) Tj 24.48 0 TD 0.0362 Tc -0.0676 Tw (2006\) uses the final subtest of the ) Tj -199.2 -23.04 TD 0.0271 Tc -0.0586 Tw (RGDT, which utilizes click stimuli of 230 ) Tj 171.36 0 TD 0 Tc 0 Tw (\265) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.0094 Tc 0.0054 Tw (ec duration followed by interstimulus ) Tj -180.96 -23.04 TD 0.0103 Tc -0.082 Tw (intervals of 0 to 40 ms presented in random order. Each stimulus pair is separated by an ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0039 Tc -0.1039 Tw (interstimulus interval of ) Tj 98.4 0 TD 0.0278 Tc -0.0798 Tw (4.5 seconds. The clicks were derived from a ) Tj 183.84 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (1) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0138 Tc -0.1138 Tw (ms compression ) Tj -290.88 -23.04 TD 0.0257 Tc -0.1257 Tw (\(positive\) section of white noise \(Keith, 2001\). ) Tj 192.48 0 TD 0.0178 Tc -0.1178 Tw (Temporal resolution) Tj 81.12 0 TD 0.0146 Tc -0.1146 Tw ( was only weakly ) Tj -273.6 -23.04 TD -0.0062 Tc 0.0982 Tw (loaded on the MSC domain \() Tj 115.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0028 Tc 0.0772 Tw (.29\) during exploratory analysis, and did not provide ) Tj -123.84 -23.04 TD -0.0118 Tc -0.0882 Tw (increased sensitivity in ) Tj 93.6 0 TD -0.0092 Tc -0.0108 Tw (identification of children at risk for \(C\)APD) Tj 176.64 0 TD 0.0529 Tc 0.0871 Tw ( \(Summers, 2003\)) Tj 72.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -345.6 -22.56 TD -0.0425 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0102 Tc -0.0665 Tw ( the Bruton Conference summary \(Jerger & Musiek, 2000\) recommended the ) Tj -37.44 -23.52 TD 0.084 Tc -0.184 Tw (use of ) Tj 26.88 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (either ) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (g) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0647 Tc -0.1647 Tw (ap detection test) Tj 64.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0367 Tc -0.1367 Tw (or d) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (ichotic ) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.106 Tc (igits) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0417 Tc -0.0583 Tw (for screening \(C\)APD) Tj 88.32 0 TD -0.0175 Tc 0.0375 Tw (, we have found ) Tj ET endstream endobj 72 0 obj 5977 endobj 70 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 51 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 71 0 R >> endobj 75 0 obj << /Length 76 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (19) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (19) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.005 Tc -0.095 Tw (only ) Tj 20.16 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (ichotic ) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (igits t) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.0135 Tc -0.0655 Tw (o be supported by factor findings in two school screening ) Tj 232.32 0 TD 0.0086 Tc 0 Tw (studies) Tj 27.84 0 TD -0.05 Tc -0.05 Tw ( in ) Tj -342.24 -22.56 TD 0.0208 Tc -0.1208 Tw (tests on almost) Tj 59.52 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( 200) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.012 Tc -0.0195 Tw ( children \(Domitz & Schow, 2000; Summers, 2003\).) Tj 209.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0054 Tc 0.2254 Tw ( With reference ) Tj -289.44 -23.04 TD 0.19 Tc 0.19 Tw (to ) Tj 10.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (g) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0018 Tc 0.3818 Tw (ap detection) Tj 48.48 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0109 Tc -0.0709 Tw ( the Bruton group did not specifically recommend any of the currently ) Tj -66.24 -23.04 TD -0.0593 Tc 0.4393 Tw (marketed version) Tj 68.64 0 TD 0.0862 Tc -0.0662 Tw (s \(i.e., RGDT or AFT) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.04 Tc (R\)) Tj 10.56 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc 0.0369 Tw ( about which questions were raised regarding ) Tj -171.36 -23.04 TD -0.0413 Tc -0.0587 Tw (validity and reliability.) Tj 90.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -90.72 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0127 Tc 0.0727 Tw (MSC \(Monaural Separation Closure\)) Tj 147.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -135.84 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0225 Tc -0.0775 Tw (MAPA ) Tj 31.2 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (m) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.0475 Tc (SAAT) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -94.56 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0062 Tc 0.0538 Tw (MAPA SINCA \(Speech ) Tj 98.4 0 TD 0.005 Tc -0.009 Tw (in Noise for Children & Adults\)) Tj 128.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -256.32 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0675 Tc -0.0325 Tw (SCAN ) Tj 29.28 0 TD -0.0305 Tc -0.0695 Tw (Auditory Figure Ground) Tj 97.44 0 TD -0.09 Tc -0.01 Tw ( \(AF) Tj 18.72 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (G) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0045 Tc -0.1045 Tw ( and Filtered ) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0.16 Tc 0 Tw (W) Tj 9.12 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (ords ) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.015 Tc -0.085 Tw (\(FW\) ) Tj 24 0 TD -0.125 Tc 0 Tw (su) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.0367 Tc (btests) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -324 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.2088 Tc 0 Tw (QuickSIN) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.045 Tc (/BKB) Tj 24 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.25 Tc (SIN) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.2475 Tc -0.3475 Tw ( test) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -133.44 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1175 Tc 0 Tw (Time) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0214 Tc (altered) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.022 Tc (/Time) Tj 24 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.031 Tc (compressed) Tj 47.52 0 TD 0.105 Tc -0.205 Tw ( speech) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -185.28 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0191 Tc 0 Tw (Performance) Tj 50.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0476 Tc -0.1476 Tw (Intensity functions \(PI) Tj 89.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0933 Tc (PB\)) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -222.24 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0328 Tc 0.1728 Tw (/MAPA mSAAT: \(MAPA Monaural Selective Auditory Attention Test) Tj 287.04 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (;) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0171 Tc 0.0029 Tw ( Schow et ) Tj -304.8 -22.56 TD 0.1125 Tc -0.2125 Tw (al., 2006) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -43.2 -23.04 TD 0.0173 Tc 0.0027 Tw (The original SAAT \(Cherry 1980) Tj 134.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0687 Tc 0.0647 Tw ( 1992\) is normed for childre) Tj 111.84 0 TD -0.0267 Tc 0.0638 Tw (n between the ages of 4 and ) Tj -248.64 -23.04 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (9 years, and takes 8 minutes to administer.) Tj 169.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0172 Tc 0.0268 Tw ( The test compares the ability of the patient to ) Tj -172.32 -23.04 TD -0.0139 Tc 0.0205 Tw (recognize monosyllabic words without competing background \(speech recognition task\) ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0205 Tc 0.0805 Tw (and embedded in background of competing high) Tj 193.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.115 Tc (intere) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.0422 Tc -0.0578 Tw (st speech.) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0354 Tc -0.1354 Tw ( Both target and ) Tj -261.12 -23.04 TD 0.0083 Tc -0.0211 Tw (competition stimuli were recorded by the same speaker, thereby eliminating speaker ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0248 Tc 0.0448 Tw (recognition cues. The signal) Tj 115.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.19 Tc (to) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0095 Tc -0.1095 Tw (competition ratio is 0 dB.) Tj 101.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.011 Tc -0.089 Tw ( Normative data provide ) Tj -234.24 -23.04 TD 0.0061 Tc -0.0581 Tw (evidence that it accurately screens in 90% of children who ha) Tj 245.28 0 TD 0.0217 Tc -0.0257 Tw (ve been identified as having ) Tj ET endstream endobj 76 0 obj 6099 endobj 73 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F4 60 0 R /F5 62 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 75 0 R >> endobj 78 0 obj << /Length 79 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (20) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (20) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.007 Tc -0.093 Tw (a learning disability, ) Tj 84 0 TD 0.0339 Tc 0.0261 Tw (which Cherry claimed ) Tj 91.68 0 TD -0.0217 Tc 0 Tw (relate) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0.19 Tw ( to ) Tj 12.48 0 TD -0.005 Tc 0.025 Tw (an underlying, but undiagnosed, ) Tj -215.52 -22.56 TD 0.0506 Tc -0.1506 Tw (\(C\)APD \(Cherry, 1992) Tj 92.64 0 TD -0.515 Tc 0 Tw (\).) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -97.92 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0187 Tc -0.0813 Tw (The MAPA Monaural) Tj 87.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0388 Tc -0.0854 Tw (SAAT \(MAPA mSAAT; Schow et al., 2006\) follows the ) Tj -121.44 -23.04 TD 0.0413 Tc -0.1413 Tw (construction of SAAT \(Cherry, 1980) Tj 147.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw ( 1992\).) Tj 28.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.2667 Tc 0.4067 Tw ( It r) Tj 13.92 0 TD 0.0239 Tc -0.1239 Tw (equires the subject to listen for a word ) Tj -194.88 -23.04 TD 0.0132 Tc -0.1475 Tw (selected from the WIPI word list that is embedded in competing background noise of ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.125 Tc 0 Tw (high) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.009 Tc 0.069 Tw (interest speech, recorded by the same speaker. This version utilizes only monaural ) Tj -20.64 -23.04 TD 0.0273 Tc -0.1273 Tw (stimulation, as a monaural low) Tj 122.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0092 Tc -0.0908 Tw (redundancy te) Tj 56.16 0 TD -0.0071 Tc 0.0671 Tw (st was needed more than a binaural test and ) Tj -182.4 -23.04 TD 0.0114 Tc -0.1114 Tw (dichotic stimulation did not improve the sensitivity of the test.) Tj 248.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0041 Tc -0.0081 Tw ( This test loaded strongly ) Tj -251.04 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (.74\) ) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.0055 Tc -0.1055 Tw (on the MSC domain in factor analysis \() Tj 156.96 0 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (Summers, 2003) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\). ) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -255.36 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.094 Tc -0.486 Tw (/MAPA ) Tj 33.6 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0562 Tc -0.1562 Tw (Speech in Noise) Tj 67.2 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0025 Tc -0.0975 Tw (for Children and Adults) Tj 102.72 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0233 Tc 0.1167 Tw ( \(MAPA S) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.178 Tc 0 Tw (INCA\)) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0342 Tc -0.1342 Tw (\(Schow et al., ) Tj -294.24 -22.56 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (2006\). ) Tj 30.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -30.72 -23.52 TD -0.0233 Tc -0.0767 Tw (Monosyllabic ) Tj 57.12 0 TD 0.0767 Tc -0.1767 Tw (PBK ) Tj 22.08 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (w) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0387 Tc -0.1388 Tw (ords were ) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0.0075 Tc 0.3725 Tw (recorded ) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0345 Tc 0.1055 Tw (and subjects ) Tj 51.84 0 TD -0.07 Tc 0 Tw (we) Tj 11.52 0 TD 0.0058 Tc 0.0542 Tw (re required to listen for the ) Tj -228.96 -22.56 TD 0.0088 Tc -0.1088 Tw (primary stimulus embedded in competing ) Tj 168.96 0 TD 0.155 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0308 Tc 0.1092 Tw (speaker babble ) Tj 62.4 0 TD 0.031 Tc 0 Tw (background) Tj 47.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.01 Tc 0.21 Tw ( With each ) Tj -303.36 -23.04 TD 0.0242 Tc -0.0762 Tw (stimulus the signal to noise ratio decreases, ultimately to 0 ) Tj 236.64 0 TD -0.0064 Tc -0.0136 Tw (dB. This test loaded strongly ) Tj -236.64 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (.72\) ) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.0158 Tc 0.0529 Tw (in the MSC domain in factor analysis \() Tj 155.04 0 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (Summers, 2003) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.035 Tc 0 Tw (\).) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -251.04 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.006 Tc 0.134 Tw (Because the ) Tj 50.4 0 TD -0.0481 Tc 0.1401 Tw (mSAAT and SINCA both load ) Tj 125.28 0 TD 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (\(i.e., the correlation between each ) Tj -205.92 -23.04 TD 0.0066 Tc -0.2026 Tw (variable and the various factors\) ) Tj 131.04 0 TD 0.0036 Tc -0.0076 Tw (strongly on the monaural factor \() Tj 132 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.07 Tc 0.07 Tw (.74 and ) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.09 Tc -0.19 Tw (.72, ) Tj -305.28 -23.04 TD 0.0686 Tc 0 Tw (respect) Tj 27.84 0 TD 0.0223 Tc -0.1223 Tw (ively\) there is support for using these two tests to screen for the monaural domain. ) Tj -27.84 -23.04 TD -0.0139 Tc 0.0616 Tw (However, SCAN AFG and SCAN FW have been shown also to load strongly \() Tj 315.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.09 Tc -0.01 Tw (.68 and ) Tj -320.64 -23.04 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0078 Tc 0.1478 Tw (.55, respectively\) with mSAAT \() Tj 131.04 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (.78 and ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0012 Tc -0.0028 Tw (.74 for left and right ear mSAAT: Domitz & ) Tj -178.56 -22.56 TD 0.0067 Tc 0 Tw (Schow,) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.027 Tc -0.031 Tw ( 2000\). It is ) Tj 50.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0286 Tc 0.3514 Tw (resumed ) Tj 36.48 0 TD -0.03 Tc -0.07 Tw (that ) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.0312 Tc 0 Tw (QuickSIN) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.045 Tc (/BKB) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.25 Tc (SIN) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.07 Tc 0.07 Tw (, which ) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.07 Tc 0 Tw (are) Tj 12 0 TD 0.0276 Tc 0.1124 Tw ( nearly identical to ) Tj -266.88 -23.52 TD -0.0036 Tc -0.0431 Tw (SINCA, would also load in the monaural domain. ) Tj 203.52 0 TD -0.033 Tc -0.067 Tw (Thus, these ) Tj 48 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.615 Tw (four ) Tj 19.2 0 TD 0.0175 Tc -0.1175 Tw (other tests should ) Tj ET endstream endobj 79 0 obj 6301 endobj 77 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 78 0 R >> endobj 81 0 obj << /Length 82 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (21) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (21) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0185 Tc 0.0385 Tw (provide good backup for ) Tj 100.8 0 TD -0.0386 Tc 0 Tw (testing) Tj 26.88 0 TD -0.0203 Tc 0.0643 Tw ( the MSC domain. This is helpful because form ) Tj -127.68 -22.56 TD -0.0173 Tc -0.0827 Tw (equivalency and t) Tj 70.08 0 TD -0.0233 Tc 0 Tw (est) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0025 Tc -0.0175 Tw (retest reliability on mSAAT and SINCA ) Tj 163.68 0 TD -0.014 Tc -0.086 Tw (need improvement) Tj 74.4 0 TD 0.085 Tc -0.185 Tw (, and ) Tj -323.04 -23.04 TD -0.0608 Tc 0.1208 Tw (until they are ) Tj 55.2 0 TD -0.035 Tc 0 Tw (better) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.0092 Tc -0.0692 Tw ( in this area it would seem prudent to supplement mSAAT and ) Tj -77.76 -23.04 TD -0.0186 Tc -0.0814 Tw (SINCA with other tests. QuickSIN) Tj 141.12 0 TD 0.045 Tc 0 Tw (/BBK) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.57 Tc (SIN) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (, fortunately ) Tj 51.36 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (have ) Tj 21.6 0 TD -0.0174 Tc 0.2374 Tw (many equivalent forms ) Tj -257.28 -23.04 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (and should have strong utilit) Tj 114.24 0 TD -0.0538 Tc 0.0738 Tw (y in the MSC domain.) Tj 87.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -202.08 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0127 Tc 0.0087 Tw (/SCAN AFG & FW \(Keith, 1995) Tj 132.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2000) Tj 22.56 0 TD 0.1 Tc -0.2 Tw (a, 2000b) Tj 34.56 0 TD -0.45 Tc 0.35 Tw (\) ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -215.52 -23.04 TD -0.0657 Tc 0.4457 Tw (The SCAN) Tj 44.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.0184 Tc -0.1184 Tw ( consists of four subtests \(Auditory Figure) Tj 168.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0144 Tc 0.1544 Tw (Ground [AFG], Filtered Words ) Tj -227.04 -23.04 TD -0.0034 Tc -0.0966 Tw ([FW], Competing Words [CW], Competing Sentences [CS]\) ) Tj 244.32 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj 17.28 0 TD -0.0722 Tc 0 Tw (represent) Tj 36.48 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0562 Tc -0.0362 Tw ( two of the ) Tj -301.92 -22.56 TD 0.0367 Tc 0.3433 Tw (ASHA \(1995) Tj 53.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.06 Tc -0.04 Tw ( 2005\) defic) Tj 47.52 0 TD 0.0134 Tc -0.0734 Tw (it areas, with AFG and FW falling into the MSC domain, and ) Tj -103.68 -23.52 TD -0.135 Tc 0.035 Tw (CW ) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.042 Tc -0.142 Tw (and CS ) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0659 Tc -0.1659 Tw (being categorized as BIBS) Tj 106.56 0 TD 0.0014 Tc 0.0906 Tw (, based on factor studies ) Tj 98.88 0 TD 0.0472 Tc -0.0272 Tw ( \(Domitz & Schow, 2000) Tj 101.28 0 TD -0.38 Tc -0.2 Tw (; ) Tj -356.64 -22.56 TD 0.0489 Tc -0.1489 Tw (Schow & Chermak, 1999) Tj 102.24 0 TD -0.1114 Tc 0.2514 Tw (\). The purpose of the SCAN) Tj 114.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.1067 Tw ( is to determine possible ) Tj -227.04 -23.52 TD -0.0226 Tc 0.0186 Tw (disorders of the central nervous sys) Tj 141.12 0 TD 0.0026 Tc -0.034 Tw (tem, to identify problems in auditory processing ) Tj -141.12 -22.56 TD 0.0265 Tc -0.1265 Tw (ability, and to identify children at risk for \(C\)APD \(Keith, 1995) Tj 254.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw ( 2000\). ) Tj 33.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 9.6 0 TD ( ) Tj -300 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0229 Tc 0.0429 Tw (The AFG subtest uses ) Tj 90.24 0 TD -0.0445 Tc 0 Tw (monosyllabi) Tj 48.96 0 TD -0.12 Tc (c) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0208 Tc -0.1208 Tw ( words with a competing multitalker babble to ) Tj -174.24 -23.04 TD 0.0225 Tc -0.1225 Tw (assist in identification of children who experienc) Tj 194.88 0 TD -0.0114 Tc 0.0714 Tw (e difficulty separating signal from noise. ) Tj -194.88 -23.04 TD 0.0595 Tc -0.1595 Tw (The FW subtest uses low) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0059 Tc -0.0941 Tw (pass filtered \(degraded\) ) Tj 96.48 0 TD -0.0445 Tc 0 Tw (monosyllabi) Tj 49.44 0 TD -0.12 Tc (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( words in an attempt to ) Tj -254.4 -23.04 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (identify children who are unable to re) Tj 150.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.01 Tc 0.0471 Tw (create the missing information. The original ) Tj -153.6 -23.04 TD -0 Tc -0.0993 Tw (SCAN was normed o) Tj 85.44 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw (n 1) Tj 12 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (035 children in the sc) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (hools \(Keith, 1986\), wherein a factor) Tj 147.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.082 Tc -0.182 Tw (study ) Tj -336.48 -23.04 TD -0.0089 Tc 0.0196 Tw (was reported that supported AFG and FW as loading in the same domain \(MSC\).) Tj 324 0 TD 0 Tc 0.38 Tw ( ) Tj -324 -23.04 TD -0.013 Tc 0 Tw (Neijenhuis) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (et al) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0039 Tc -0.0239 Tw (\(2000\) also found factor support for AFG and FW testing within an ) Tj -67.68 -22.56 TD -0.082 Tc 0.462 Tw (MSC domain.) Tj 55.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 82 0 obj 5636 endobj 80 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 81 0 R >> endobj 84 0 obj << /Length 85 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (22) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (22) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0121 Tc 0.0081 Tw (The SCAN takes approximately 20 minute) Tj 170.4 0 TD -0.0019 Tc -0.0181 Tw (s to administer, but provides a ) Tj -200.64 -22.56 TD 0.0082 Tc -0.0739 Tw (reasonably deep level of screening, and is designed for use with children between the ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0382 Tc 0.1439 Tw (ages of 3 and 11 years. Test) Tj 113.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0165 Tc -0.0631 Tw (retest reliability of the SCAN is relatively unstable \(Amos ) Tj -116.64 -23.04 TD 0.0015 Tc -0.0415 Tw (& Humes, 1998\), and administration of the SCAN i) Tj 206.4 0 TD 0.0155 Tc -0.1155 Tw (s sensitive to the administration ) Tj -206.4 -23.04 TD 0.007 Tc -0.107 Tw (environment \(Emerson, Crandall, Seikel & Chermak, 1997; but see Keith, 1998\), but ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0179 Tc -0.1179 Tw (appears to be unbiased with reference to race of the individual being tested \(Woods, ) Tj T* 0.0141 Tc 0.0459 Tw (Pe\361a, & Martin, 2004) Tj 87.36 0 TD -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.0345 Tc -0.1345 Tw (Humes, Amos, ) Tj 62.4 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.0564 Tc -0.1564 Tw (Wynne \(1998\)) Tj 58.56 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw ( a) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.0237 Tc -0.1237 Tw (lso noted) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0.0106 Tc 0.0094 Tw ( weaknesses in that ) Tj -278.4 -23.04 TD -0.003 Tc 0.063 Tw (the SCAN does not have multiple forms. In addition, the SCAN ) Tj 260.64 0 TD 0.015 Tc 0 Tw (uses) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0586 Tc -0.0414 Tw (nternal ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.046 Tc -0.534 Tw (onsistency ) Tj -317.76 -23.04 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0027 Tc 0.3773 Tw (oefficients ) Tj 44.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (r) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0789 Tc -0.1789 Tw (ather than ) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0233 Tc (est) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD (r) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.078 Tc -0.178 Tw (etest ) Tj 21.12 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0027 Tc (oefficients) Tj 42.24 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw ( to calculate c) Tj 55.2 0 TD 0.0456 Tc 0.3344 Tw (onfidence ) Tj 42.24 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0025 Tc (ntervals) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.01 Tc 0.15 Tw (, which ) Tj -313.92 -22.56 TD -0.0102 Tc -0.0098 Tw (results in artificially smaller standard errors ) Tj 176.64 0 TD 0.0223 Tc -0.1223 Tw (of the mean and narrower confidence ) Tj -176.64 -23.52 TD -0 Tc -0.0518 Tw (intervals, leading to classification of more scores as outside normal l) Tj 273.6 0 TD 0.0883 Tc -0.1883 Tw (imits. ) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -299.04 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0171 Tc 0.1353 Tw (The SCAN is highly dependent upon verbal knowledge \(Chermak & Musiek, ) Tj -30.24 -23.52 TD 0.0242 Tc -0.1242 Tw (1997\), and thus is limited to English) Tj 145.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0529 Tc -0.0329 Tw (speaking children. Chermak, Sty) Tj 133.44 0 TD -0.0467 Tc 0 Tw (ers) Tj 11.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0622 Tc 0.1222 Tw ( and Seikel ) Tj -296.16 -22.56 TD 0.0039 Tc -0.1039 Tw (\(1995\) found that the ) Tj 87.36 0 TD -0.0475 Tc -0.0525 Tw (SAAT ) Tj 28.32 0 TD -0.0058 Tc -0.0142 Tw (identified greater numbers of children as at) Tj 171.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.1008 Tw (risk for \(C\)APD) Tj 64.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -356.16 -23.04 TD -0.0864 Tc 0.1464 Tw (than did the SCAN) Tj 75.84 0 TD 0.38 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -81.12 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0446 Tc -0.0554 Tw (/QuickSIN test) Tj 59.04 0 TD 0.045 Tc 0 Tw (/BKB) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.25 Tc (SIN) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.0092 Tc -0.0025 Tw ( \(QuickSIN Speech in Noise Test, Version 1.3: ) Tj 193.44 0 TD -0.0238 Tc -0.0762 Tw (Etymotic ) Tj -310.56 -23.04 TD -0.0085 Tc -0.0915 Tw (Research, 2001) Tj 61.92 0 TD 0.108 Tc -0.208 Tw (, 2005) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -90.24 -23.04 TD 0.02 Tc -0.024 Tw (The QuickSIN is designed to ) Tj 118.56 0 TD 0.0092 Tc -0.0612 Tw (assess a subject\222s ability to listen within a background of ) Tj -118.56 -23.04 TD -0.015 Tc -0.085 Tw (noise. ) Tj 28.8 0 TD -0.0183 Tc -0.0817 Tw (The BKB) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0131 Tc -0.0695 Tw (SIN is a similar test which is appropriate and normed for children) Tj 262.08 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -332.64 -23.04 TD 0.0913 Tc -0.1913 Tw (\(Etymotic, 2005\)) Tj 68.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.0085 Tc -0.0915 Tw (These tests are) Tj 58.56 0 TD -0 Tc 0.0073 Tw ( designed to rapidly provide a reasonable estimate of ) Tj -134.4 -22.56 TD -0.0179 Tc -0.0821 Tw (the functional signal) Tj 81.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.19 Tc (to) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.04 Tc 0.1 Tw (noise ratio ) Tj 44.64 0 TD -0.01 Tc 0 Tw (at) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0146 Tc -0.1146 Tw (which an individual can comprehend speech. ) Tj ET endstream endobj 85 0 obj 5614 endobj 83 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 84 0 R >> endobj 87 0 obj << /Length 88 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (23) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (23) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.2088 Tc (QuickSIN) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.045 Tc (/BKB) Tj 24 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.16 Tc 0.06 Tw (SIN are) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.0229 Tc 0.1029 Tw ( very similar to the MAPA SINCA and ) Tj 158.88 0 TD 0.078 Tc 0 Tw (their) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.043 Tc -0.143 Tw ( use of noise ) Tj 52.8 0 TD 0.19 Tc 0.19 Tw (to ) Tj -327.84 -22.56 TD 0.005 Tc -0.105 Tw (reduce redundancy places ) Tj 105.6 0 TD 0.16 Tc 0 Tw (them) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.0071 Tc -0.0271 Tw ( in the MSC auditory domain category.) Tj 156.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0892 Tc (/Performance) Tj 53.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0019 Tc -0.1019 Tw (Intensity functions \(PI) Tj 89.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0933 Tc (PB\)) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -180.48 -23.04 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0129 Tc 0 Tw (Perform) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.3 Tc (ance) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1 Tc (i) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0363 Tc -0.0637 Tw (ntensity ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (f) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.015 Tc (unctions) Tj 36 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.011 Tc 0.103 Tw ( for phonetically balanced words \(PI) Tj 145.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0473 Tc 0.1073 Tw (PB\) have been ) Tj -286.56 -23.04 TD 0.0258 Tc -0.1258 Tw (proposed as a means of testing monaural low) Tj 180 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.007 Tc -0.093 Tw (redundancy processing) Tj 91.68 0 TD 0.0892 Tc -0.1892 Tw ( \(Humes, 2005\)) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj -338.4 -23.04 TD 0.0168 Tc -0.1168 Tw (Theoretically, the performance) Tj 123.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0198 Tc -0.1198 Tw (intensity function would improve dramatically as ) Tj -126.24 -23.04 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (intensity increased) Tj 74.4 0 TD 0.0035 Tc -0.0162 Tw (, but could reveal deficits in individuals for whom greater redundancy ) Tj -74.4 -23.04 TD -0.0388 Tc 0.1788 Tw (is required. To date) Tj 80.16 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0255 Tc -0.0855 Tw ( only one study \(Humes, 2005\) has examined it with relation to ) Tj -82.56 -22.56 TD -0.001 Tc 0.021 Tw (auditory processing, and results were equivocal. Nonetheless, the ready ability to ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0727 Tc -0.1727 Tw (generate a PI) Tj 51.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.125 Tc (PB) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.0182 Tc -0.0746 Tw ( function through standard audiometric assessment speaks to the need to ) Tj -67.68 -22.56 TD 0.0076 Tc -0.1076 Tw (pursue this as a potential screening instrument.) Tj 187.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -187.2 -23.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0092 Tc -0.0908 Tw (BIBS \(Binaural integration,) Tj 112.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0174 Tc -0.1174 Tw (Binaural separation\)) Tj 81.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -187.2 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0033 Tc 0.0567 Tw (MAPA Dichotic Digits ) Tj 95.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -124.8 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0077 Tc -0.1077 Tw (MAPA Competing ) Tj 78.24 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (S) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0762 Tc (entences) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -150.24 -24 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0189 Tc -0.0811 Tw (SCAN Competing Words ) Tj 104.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -134.4 -23.52 TD /F4 10 Tf 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\267) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F5 10 Tf 0 Tc 0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 25.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0367 Tc 0 Tw (Staggered) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.0056 Tc -0.2256 Tw ( Spondaic Words \(SSW\) ) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -200.64 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1425 Tc -0.4375 Tw (MAPA ) Tj 30.72 0 TD 0.0107 Tc -0.1107 Tw (Dichotic Digits ) Tj 66.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -115.2 -23.04 TD 0.0027 Tc -0.0387 Tw (This test presents a different series of digits to each ear simultaneously, with the task ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0016 Tc 0.0493 Tw (being to identify as many numbers as possible. Instructions vary, including requiring ) Tj ET endstream endobj 88 0 obj 4866 endobj 86 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R /F4 60 0 R /F5 62 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 87 0 R >> endobj 90 0 obj << /Length 91 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (24) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (24) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.0058 Tc -0.1058 Tw (correct order, identificatio) Tj 104.64 0 TD 0.0048 Tc -0.0248 Tw (n of ear of presentation, or simply listing the numbers heard. ) Tj -104.64 -22.56 TD -0.0195 Tc 0.0395 Tw (Results rely on binaural ) Tj 97.44 0 TD -0.0118 Tc 0 Tw (integration) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.0293 Tc -0.0093 Tw (, attention, and auditory memory) Tj 131.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -274.56 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (The MAPA ) Tj 48.96 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0136 Tc -0.0864 Tw (Dichotic Dig) Tj 53.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0039 Tc -0.0639 Tw (its test \(DD: Schow et al., 2006\) is derived from Musiek ) Tj -132.48 -23.04 TD -0.0097 Tc 0.0057 Tw (\(1983\). The original formulation required) Tj 168.48 0 TD -0.0024 Tc -0.029 Tw ( that two number pairs be presented ) Tj -168.48 -23.04 TD 0.0096 Tc -0.0776 Tw (simultaneously to each ear of the listener, with the subject being required to repeat all ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0154 Tc 0.0754 Tw (four numbers. The MAPA DD employed number triplets presented dichotically, similar ) Tj T* 0.0244 Tc -0.1244 Tw (to that of Neijenhuis) Tj 82.08 0 TD -0.028 Tc -0.072 Tw ( et al.) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.0043 Tc -0.1043 Tw ( \(2000\). The subj) Tj 71.52 0 TD 0.014 Tc -0.114 Tw (ect repeats items from the right ear first, then ) Tj -175.2 -23.04 TD 0.0101 Tc -0.0732 Tw (from the left, following Moncrieff and Musiek \(2002\). This test loaded strongly ) Tj 324 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (.67\) ) Tj -332.64 -23.04 TD 0.0045 Tc -0.0445 Tw (on the BIBS auditory domain during factor analysis \() Tj 212.64 0 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (Summers, 2003) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.035 Tc 0 Tw (\).) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.029 Tc -0.071 Tw ( Again, it is ) Tj -281.76 -22.56 TD -0.0234 Tc 0.0034 Tw (important to note that while loading o) Tj 150.72 0 TD 0.0175 Tc -0.0375 Tw (n the same factor suggests that double) Tj 152.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0425 Tc -0.1425 Tw (digit and ) Tj -306.24 -23.52 TD 0.0086 Tc -0.0717 Tw (triplet pairs both provide some measure of similar processes \(the triplet \(MAPA\) DD ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0.0127 Tc -0.0339 Tw (probably involves memory to a greater extent than the double) Tj 246.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (digit DD) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -289.44 -23.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0396 Tc 0.1796 Tw (/MAPA Competing Sentences) Tj 120.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -135.84 -23.04 TD -0.0533 Tc 0 Tw (Willeford) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.51 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 6.24 0 TD 0.0244 Tc -0.1244 Tw (1985\) intr) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.001 Tc 0.059 Tw (oduced the Competing Sentences Test \(CS\), and Keith \(2000\) ) Tj -84.48 -23.04 TD -0.019 Tc 0.015 Tw (integrated competing sentences into the SCAN) Tj 187.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0028 Tc 0.0399 Tw (A. In the MAPA Competing Sentences ) Tj -191.04 -23.04 TD -0.0069 Tc 0.0098 Tw (Test \(Schow et al, 2006\), two sentences are presented dichotically, and the subject repeats ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0029 Tc -0.0971 Tw (both sentences. ) Tj 66.24 0 TD -0.1333 Tc 0.0333 Tw (This mo) Tj 32.64 0 TD 0.0071 Tc -0.0471 Tw (re difficult task was used because of a ce) Tj 163.2 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0105 Tc -0.1105 Tw (ling effect identified by ) Tj -264.96 -23.04 TD -0.0131 Tc 0.1264 Tw (Shiffman \(1999\) when only one sentence was repeated. ) Tj 227.04 0 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (Subjects are required to repeat ) Tj -227.04 -23.04 TD 0.0105 Tc -0.0736 Tw (either the right or the left ear first, and stimuli must be repeated ) Tj 255.84 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (with 100% accuracy) Tj 81.6 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw ( to be ) Tj -337.44 -23.04 TD -0.0443 Tc 0 Tw (conside) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0043 Tc -0.0403 Tw (red correct. Subjects are not penalized for reversing the order of the sentences as ) Tj -30.24 -22.56 TD -0.0411 Tc -0.0589 Tw (repeated. ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.022 Tc -0.122 Tw (Due to the greater difficulty of the modified task, 8) Tj 204.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.19 Tc -0.05 Tw ( to ) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (9) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1375 Tc (year) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0125 Tc -0.1125 Tw (old subjects\222 ) Tj -290.4 -23.52 TD 0.0192 Tc -0.0392 Tw (mean performance was only 41% \() Tj 142.56 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.37 Tc 0 Tw (SD) Tj 12.48 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.108 Tc -0.208 Tw (= 14%\)) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0041 Tc -0.1041 Tw (This test loaded strongly ) Tj 100.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (.65\) ) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (on) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.0533 Tw ( the ) Tj ET endstream endobj 91 0 obj 5500 endobj 89 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 74 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 90 0 R >> endobj 94 0 obj << /Length 95 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (25) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (25) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0069 Tc 0.0029 Tw (BIBS auditory domain during factor analysis.) Tj 181.92 0 TD 0.0309 Tc -0.1309 Tw ( Besides the strong factor loading of DD ) Tj -181.92 -22.56 TD -0.0074 Tc -0.0126 Tw (and CS, the work of Domitz and Schow \(2000\) and Schow, Seikel, Chermak) Tj 306.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw ( and Berent ) Tj -309.12 -23.04 TD 0.0185 Tc -0.0785 Tw (\(2000\) recorded a 0.70 correlation between DD and CS, which strongly supports ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.035 Tc 0 Tw (comb) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.0475 Tw (ining those two tests to derive a measure of the binaural domain \(BIBS\). DD is ) Tj -22.08 -23.04 TD 0.0051 Tc -0.0651 Tw (thought to involve binaural integration, and because subjects are asked to repeat ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0056 Tc 0.1344 Tw (competing sentences ) Tj 85.44 0 TD -0.0425 Tc -0.0575 Tw (\(CS\) ) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.0287 Tc -0.1287 Tw (in a certain order) Tj 68.16 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0339 Tc -0.0806 Tw ( this appears to be a binaural separation task ) Tj -177.12 -23.04 TD 0.155 Tc -0.255 Tw (or ) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (some combination of binaural integration and separation) Tj 225.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -239.04 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0486 Tc 0.1086 Tw (SCAN CW Subtest \() Tj 82.08 0 TD 0.055 Tc -0.155 Tw (Keith, 2000a,) Tj 54.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (2000) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.2 Tc (b) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -195.84 -22.56 TD 0.0033 Tc -0.0295 Tw (The Competing Words subtest is a dichotic task in which words are presented ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.0252 Tc -0.1252 Tw (simultaneously to both ears and the child is required to i) Tj 224.64 0 TD -0.0594 Tc 0.1994 Tw (dentify both words) Tj 74.88 0 TD 0.38 Tc -0.48 Tw (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0222 Tc -0.1222 Tw (Domitz and ) Tj -307.2 -22.56 TD 0.0208 Tc -0.1208 Tw (Schow \(2000\) re) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.0183 Tc 0 Tw (ported) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.0095 Tc -0.1095 Tw ( that the CW subtest loaded onto the BIBS domain.) Tj 204.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0125 Tc -0.1125 Tw (Schow and ) Tj -299.52 -23.52 TD -0.0188 Tc -0.0812 Tw (Chermak \() Tj 42.24 0 TD 0.134 Tc -0.234 Tw (1999\) ) Tj 26.4 0 TD -0.0105 Tc -0.0895 Tw (compared results of SCAN ) Tj 109.92 0 TD 0.105 Tc -0.205 Tw (CW ) Tj 18.72 0 TD -0.0167 Tc 0.1087 Tw (and Staggered Spondaic Words \(SSW: ) Tj -197.28 -22.56 TD 0.0049 Tc -0.0516 Tw (Katz, 1962\), revealing that the SSW \(left and right ) Tj 204.48 0 TD -0.0322 Tc -0.0678 Tw (Competing ) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw (SSW scores\) were high) Tj 93.12 0 TD 0.19 Tc -0.29 Tw (ly ) Tj -344.64 -23.04 TD -0.0142 Tc -0.0858 Tw (related to the ) Tj 54.24 0 TD 0.05 Tc 0 Tw (C) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.0344 Tc -0.0656 Tw (W subtests) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.0393 Tc -0.1393 Tw ( and all three load on the BIBS domain) Tj 156 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0.48 Tw (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -268.32 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0195 Tc 0.0995 Tw (/Staggered Spondaic Word Test: SSW \(Katz, 1962\) ) Tj 211.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -226.56 -23.04 TD 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (T) Tj 6.24 0 TD -0.0097 Tc 0.0943 Tw (he SSW is a dichotic task that requires the listener to simultaneously process ) Tj -6.24 -23.04 TD -0.004 Tc 0.064 Tw (information presented to both ears. The design of ) Tj 202.08 0 TD 0.0166 Tc -0.1166 Tw (the stimuli is such that the second ) Tj -202.08 -23.04 TD 0.0109 Tc -0.0423 Tw (syllable of one spondee overlaps with the first syllable of its contralateral counterpart. ) Tj 348.96 0 TD -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (As ) Tj -348.96 -23.04 TD -0.0109 Tc -0.0891 Tw (noted above, ) Tj 53.76 0 TD -0.0089 Tc -0.0911 Tw (Schow and Chermak \(199) Tj 104.16 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (9) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0256 Tc 0.0322 Tw (\) found that the SSW loads positively in the ) Tj -163.2 -22.56 TD -0.0445 Tc -0.0555 Tw (BIBS domain.) Tj 56.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -56.64 -23.52 TD ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 95 0 obj 4719 endobj 92 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 94 0 R >> endobj 97 0 obj << /Length 98 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (26) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (26) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.04 Tc (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0225 Tc 0.1625 Tw (Binaural Interaction \() Tj 85.92 0 TD 0.02 Tc 0 Tw (Soun) Tj 20.16 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw (d ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0255 Tc -0.1255 Tw (ocalization ) Tj 46.56 0 TD 0.1467 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (l) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0377 Tc (ateralization) Tj 49.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -253.44 -22.56 TD -0.0425 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0235 Tc -0.1235 Tw ( masking level differences and ) Tj 124.8 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0022 Tc -0.0978 Tw (nteraural ) Tj 37.92 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1212 Tc (ntensity) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0012 Tc -0.1012 Tw ( and interaural time) Tj 78.24 0 TD -0.021 Tc -0.079 Tw ( difference ) Tj -315.84 -23.04 TD 0.092 Tc 0.288 Tw (tests ) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.1283 Tc 0.0283 Tw ( \(i.e., ) Tj 22.56 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.0858 Tc 0 Tw (localization) Tj 48.96 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0014 Tc (lateralization) Tj 56.64 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.0113 Tc 0.0313 Tw (have been proposed for testing in this domain, ) Tj -157.44 -23.04 TD -0.0116 Tc -0.0198 Tw (there are no known studies which have ) Tj 157.44 0 TD 0.32 Tc 0 Tw (an) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.13 Tc (alyzed) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.0375 Tc -0.1375 Tw ( the factor structu) Tj 70.56 0 TD 0.0087 Tc -0.1087 Tw (res of these tests. ) Tj 72.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -336.96 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1062 Tc (Questionnaire) Tj 55.2 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -77.76 -23.04 TD -0.0329 Tc 0 Tw (Several) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD /F2 10 Tf -0.0938 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 58.08 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 4.32 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0432 Tc 0.1032 Tw ( for \(C\)APD have been devised, ) Tj 130.08 0 TD 0.0085 Tc -0.1085 Tw (based on the assumption ) Tj 100.32 0 TD 0.09 Tc -0.19 Tw (that ) Tj -325.44 -23.04 TD -0.0087 Tc 0.0933 Tw (children and adults with the disorder have distinctive behavioral profiles that can provide ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0229 Tc -0.1229 Tw (useful screenin) Tj 60 0 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (g information.) Tj 57.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -119.52 -22.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.02 Tc (H) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0112 Tc -0.0888 Tw (Fisher\222s Auditory Problems Checklist) Tj 150.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0431 Tc -0.1431 Tw (\(Fisher, 1976\) ) Tj 59.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -233.76 -22.56 TD -0.005 Tc 0.385 Tw (This ) Tj 20.16 0 TD -0.0831 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0.017 Tc -0.069 Tw ( itemizes behaviors such as failure to attend to instructions, ) Tj 239.52 0 TD 0.0143 Tc 0.1257 Tw (the need ) Tj -313.44 -23.52 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.5333 Tw (for ) Tj 13.92 0 TD 0.0132 Tc -0.1132 Tw (repeated instructions, and easy distraction by auditory stimuli. ) Tj 253.44 0 TD 0.0431 Tc -0.1431 Tw (Examination of ) Tj 64.8 0 TD -0.0733 Tc -0.0267 Tw (the ) Tj -332.16 -22.56 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (qu) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.0182 Tc (estionnaire) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.0327 Tc -0.1327 Tw ( reveals that ) Tj 50.88 0 TD 0.0193 Tc -0.0393 Tw (the preponderance of items on the ) Tj 138.24 0 TD -0.0831 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0.0144 Tc -0.1144 Tw ( relate to a ) Tj -296.64 -23.04 TD -0.0725 Tc 0 Tw (language) Tj 36 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.1112 Tw (based deficit \(e.g., lack of comprehension of speech at age level\)) Tj 259.2 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0329 Tc 0.2529 Tw ( Several ) Tj -303.36 -23.04 TD 0.0032 Tc 0.0568 Tw (questions relate to discrimination ability, directly addressing the ASHA \(1996) Tj 312.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2005) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj -337.44 -23.04 TD 0.0072 Tc -0.1072 Tw (criteria, and one reflects degraded processing in ) Tj 193.44 0 TD 0.36 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0041 Tc -0.1041 Tw (competing acoustic environment. ) Tj -200.64 -23.04 TD 0.007 Tc 0.013 Tw (Attentional and memory issues, not reflected in ASHA \(1996) Tj 245.76 0 TD -0.14 Tc 0.04 Tw (; 2005) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.0087 Tc -0.0913 Tw (\), are relatively ) Tj -270.72 -23.04 TD 0.0105 Tc 0.0095 Tw (prominent elements of the ) Tj 107.04 0 TD -0.0092 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0.0121 Tc 0.0479 Tw (, as are language abilities. ) Tj 108.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -269.28 -34.56 TD ( ) Tj 0 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0436 Tc 0.4236 Tw (Children\222s A) Tj 50.88 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (uditory ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.013 Tc -0.087 Tw (Processing ) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0469 Tc 0.4269 Tw (Performance Scale) Tj 75.84 0 TD -0.144 Tc 0.044 Tw ( \(CHAP) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (P) Tj 6.24 0 TD -0.81 Tc (S:) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0.18 Tw ( S) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.07 Tc -0.03 Tw (moski, Brunt) Tj 52.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.38 Tc -0.24 Tw ( & ) Tj -331.2 -23.52 TD 0.0107 Tc -0.3507 Tw (Tannahill, 1992\) ) Tj 69.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 98 0 obj 5939 endobj 96 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 97 0 R >> endobj 100 0 obj << /Length 101 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (27) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (27) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0133 Tc 0.0733 Tw (The Children\222s Auditory ) Tj 101.28 0 TD -0.013 Tc -0.087 Tw (Processing ) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0014 Tc -0.0986 Tw (Performance Scale \(CHAP) Tj 108 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0 Tw (P) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.365 Tc (S\)) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.098 Tc -0.198 Tw ( is a 25) Tj 28.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0023 Tc -0.1023 Tw (item scale that ) Tj -301.44 -22.56 TD 0.023 Tc -0.091 Tw (allows the user to rate behaviors in multiple conditions. Parents and teachers can be us) Tj 348.48 0 TD -0.16 Tc 0.06 Tw (ed ) Tj -348.48 -23.04 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.1062 Tw (as informants. ) Tj 61.44 0 TD 0.0079 Tc 0.0361 Tw (Smoski et al. \(1992\) reported variable listening performance for 64 ) Tj -61.44 -23.04 TD -0.0041 Tc -0.0959 Tw (children diagnosed with \(C\)APD ) Tj 133.92 0 TD 0.0489 Tc -0.1009 Tw (on the basis of failing two or more of a four) Tj 175.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0345 Tc 0.1745 Tw (test battery ) Tj -312.48 -23.04 TD -0.0151 Tc 0.0751 Tw (comprised of the Staggered Spondaic Word \(SSW\) Test, and versions of dichotic d) Tj 332.16 0 TD -0.0083 Tc -0.0917 Tw (igits, ) Tj -332.16 -23.04 TD 0.0072 Tc -0.0592 Tw (competing sentences, and pitch patterns. Children with \(C\)APD demonstrated difficulties ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0034 Tc -0.0691 Tw (in quiet and ideal listening conditions, as well as in competing noise and stressful ) Tj T* -0.019 Tc -0.081 Tw (listening conditions. ) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -85.44 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0114 Tc -0.0886 Tw (Evaluation of Classroom Listening Behavior \(ECLB) Tj 209.76 0 TD 0.1 Tc -0.2 Tw (: ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0117 Tc -0.1117 Tw (VanDyke, 1985) Tj 63.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -302.88 -23.04 TD -0.0443 Tc -0.0557 Tw (The ECLB ) Tj 45.6 0 TD 0.0425 Tc -0.1425 Tw (is a rating scale completed by the classroom teacher) Tj 207.84 0 TD 0.016 Tc 0.044 Tw (. It is) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.0244 Tc -0.1244 Tw ( designed to identify ) Tj -276.48 -23.52 TD -0.0125 Tc -0.0875 Tw (listening and academic ) Tj 94.08 0 TD -0.0325 Tc -0.0675 Tw (problems ) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.0096 Tc 0.0704 Tw (in children. The listening behavior subtest focuses ) Tj -133.44 -22.56 TD 0.0244 Tc -0.1244 Tw (heavily on attention) Tj 79.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0017 Tc -0.0023 Tw (based phenomena \(e.g., paying attention t) Tj 166.56 0 TD 0.0235 Tc -0.1235 Tw (o oral instruction; off) Tj 85.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1725 Tc 0.2075 Tw (task ) Tj -337.44 -23.52 TD 0.0074 Tc -0.0674 Tw (behaviors; short attention span\), but also includes more specific \(C\)APD elements, such ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD 0 Tc -0.0263 Tw (as following oral instructions and distraction in background of noise. A specific ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0012 Tc -0.1012 Tw (Classroom Listening Behavior subscale elicits response d) Tj 229.44 0 TD 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (ifferences based on ) Tj -229.44 -23.04 TD -0.0036 Tc -0 Tw (environment \(noise, group, quiet\), presence of visual cues, complexity of directions) Tj 334.56 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw ( and ) Tj -336.96 -23.04 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.0753 Tw (distance from speaker. As such, it provides greater detail about specific classroom ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0053 Tc -0.0573 Tw (listening abilities related to \(C\)APD, and may be a useful br) Tj 240 0 TD -0.0133 Tc 0 Tw (oad) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.008 Tc 0.028 Tw (spectrum screen for the ) Tj -257.76 -22.56 TD -0.0256 Tc 0 Tw (disorder.) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.006 Tc 0.034 Tw ( That having been said, no research has been identified relating results of ECLB ) Tj -35.04 -23.52 TD -0.0365 Tc 0.1765 Tw (and \(C\)APD testing.) Tj 81.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -81.6 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0304 Tc 0.0904 Tw (Children\222s Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties \(CHILD) Tj 248.64 0 TD 0.1 Tc -0.2 Tw (: ) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.0111 Tc 0.1511 Tw (Anderson & ) Tj -272.64 -23.04 TD -0.1125 Tc 0 Tw (Smaldino) Tj 37.92 0 TD -0.044 Tc 0.424 Tw (, n.d.) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (\) ) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 101 0 obj 4817 endobj 99 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 100 0 R >> endobj 103 0 obj << /Length 104 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (28) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (28) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.082 Tc -0.182 Tw (CHILD is a \223family) Tj 79.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.205 Tc (cent) Tj 16.32 0 TD 0.023 Tc -0.123 Tw (ered\224 parent survey that allows parents to assess a child\222s ) Tj -99.36 -22.56 TD -0.0209 Tc 0.1009 Tw (listening behavior within the home environment. It ) Tj 208.32 0 TD 0.0356 Tc -0.0671 Tw (may be used to assess listening skills ) Tj -208.32 -23.04 TD -0.027 Tc 0.0641 Tw (in a child as young as 3 years) Tj 117.12 0 TD 0.22 Tc -0.32 Tw ( old) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.0109 Tc -0.037 Tw ( and as old as 12. The items focus on hearing difficulty ) Tj -132.48 -23.04 TD -0.0258 Tc -0.0742 Tw (and comprehen) Tj 60.96 0 TD 0.0069 Tc -0.0109 Tw (sion in quiet and noisy settings, rather than on specific \(C\)APD) Tj 253.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -314.88 -23.04 TD 0.0161 Tc -0.0681 Tw (characteristics, but may serve as a broad screen for processing deficit.) Tj 279.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -279.36 -35.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0214 Tc -0.0786 Tw (Use of Questionnaires to ) Tj 100.8 0 TD -0.0075 Tc 0 Tw (Differentiat) Tj 46.56 0 TD -0.12 Tc (e) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0379 Tc 0.0979 Tw ( ADHD from \(C\)APD) Tj 88.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -259.2 -23.04 TD 0.0076 Tc -0.0542 Tw (Similarities between ADHD and \(C\)APD provide a source of o) Tj 253.44 0 TD -0.0062 Tc 0.0262 Tw (ngoing unease within the ) Tj -253.44 -23.04 TD -0.0026 Tc -0.0235 Tw (educational and audiological communities. A diagnosis of ADHD is made based upon ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0179 Tc 0.0779 Tw (criteria put forward by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual \(DSM) Tj 270.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0059 Tc 0.0541 Tw (IV\), which provides ) Tj -273.6 -22.56 TD -0.012 Tc 0.0429 Tw (the definition of ADHD. Within that framework, ADHD is seen a) Tj 264.96 0 TD 0.031 Tc -0.131 Tw (s a deficit resulting in ) Tj -264.96 -23.52 TD -0.0052 Tc 0.3852 Tw (inattention, hyperactivity) Tj 100.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0034 Tc 0.0101 Tw ( and/or impulsivity. Some characteristics provided by the ) Tj -102.72 -22.56 TD -0.1833 Tc 0 Tw (DSM) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0119 Tc 0.0079 Tw (IV guidelines include poor attention, poor listening skills, distraction, and ) Tj -25.44 -23.52 TD 0.0056 Tc -0.1056 Tw (forgetfulness, common characteristics ascribed to individuals w) Tj 254.4 0 TD -0.0328 Tc 0.1728 Tw (ith \(C\)APD. Chermak, ) Tj -254.4 -22.56 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (Somers) Tj 29.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0011 Tc -0.0138 Tw ( and Seikel \(1998\) examined the overlap between characteristics ascribed to ) Tj -32.64 -23.04 TD -0.0036 Tc 0.0345 Tw (\(C\)APD and ADHD by the respective diagnosing professionals, and ferreted out ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0142 Tc 0.0208 Tw (discerning characteristics for each disorder that would serve as component) Tj 297.6 0 TD 0.155 Tc -0.095 Tw (s of a ) Tj -297.6 -23.04 TD -0.0092 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 7.68 0 TD -0.0229 Tc 0.0029 Tw (See below how these findings in conju) Tj 154.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (n) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0 Tc -0.02 Tw (ction with other work have been ) Tj -220.32 -23.04 TD -0.0121 Tc 0.043 Tw (used to create a new questionnaire. This new tool, therefore, ) Tj 246.24 0 TD -0.0443 Tc 0 Tw (provide) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.05 Tc (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0129 Tc -0.0871 Tw ( discriminating ) Tj -280.32 -22.56 TD -0.0028 Tc -0.0372 Tw (elements used by professionals to differentiate the two disorders.) Tj 259.68 0 TD -0.0513 Tc -0.0487 Tw ( See Chapt) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0967 Tc -0.0033 Tw (er 1) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (5) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.1133 Tc -0.2133 Tw ( for ) Tj -323.04 -23.52 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0247 Tw (discussion of differential diagnosis of \(C\)APD and ADHD.) Tj 236.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -236.64 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (4) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0408 Tc 0.0608 Tw (Scale of Auditory Behaviors \() Tj 119.52 0 TD -0.0833 Tc 0 Tw (SAB) Tj 19.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.2 Tc (S) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.08 Tc 0.22 Tw (ee Appendix ) Tj 52.8 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.02 Tc (A) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0014 Tc -0.1014 Tw (; Conlin, 2003; Shiffman, ) Tj -237.6 -23.04 TD 0.052 Tc -0.632 Tw (1999; ) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.0162 Tc -0.1162 Tw (Simpson, 1981; Summers, 2003\) ) Tj 136.32 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 104 0 obj 5040 endobj 102 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 103 0 R >> endobj 106 0 obj << /Length 107 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (29) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (29) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.007 Tc 0.1252 Tw (The Teacher\222s Scale of Auditory Behaviors and the Parent\222s Scale of Aud) Tj 295.68 0 TD 0.0057 Tc -0.1057 Tw (itory Behaviors ) Tj -295.68 -22.56 TD -0.0035 Tc -0.0065 Tw (\(Simpson, 1981\) were normed on 96 children, ages 4 to 6 years. Domitz and Schow ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0158 Tc -0.0473 Tw (\(2000\) validated the Teacher\222s Scale with the 81 participants in their study, including 17 ) Tj T* 0.0026 Tc -0.0066 Tw (who ultimately were identified as having \(C\)APD. Shiffman \(1999\) re) Tj 283.68 0 TD -0.0163 Tc 0.1563 Tw (fined the ) Tj -283.68 -23.04 TD -0.0015 Tc -0.0246 Tw (instrument by identifying the most useful items to contrast the 7 children diagnosed ) Tj 336.96 0 TD -0.125 Tc 0.025 Tw (with ) Tj -336.96 -23.04 TD 0.0054 Tc -0.0154 Tw (\(C\)APD versus the 12 children identified as not having \(C\)APD. Twelve of these items ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0112 Tc -0.0452 Tw (were found to be congruent with the recommendations of the Bruton gro) Tj 289.92 0 TD 0.006 Tc -0.106 Tw (up \(Jerger & ) Tj -289.92 -23.04 TD -0.0031 Tc -0.0009 Tw (Musiek, 2000\), as well as with the findings of Chermak, Somers) Tj 257.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0025 Tc 0.0895 Tw ( and Seikel \(1998\). ) Tj -259.68 -23.04 TD -0.0106 Tc 0.0952 Tw (These 12 items formed a new questionnaire called the Scale of Auditory Behaviors ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0.0267 Tc -0.0733 Tw (\(SAB\) \() Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.0242 Tc -0.3642 Tw (Conlin, 2006; ) Tj 58.08 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.23 Tw (Schow et al., 2006; ) Tj 79.2 0 TD 0.0178 Tc -0.1178 Tw (Summers, 2003\). Summers found that us) Tj 163.68 0 TD -0.0967 Tc -0.2433 Tw (e of ) Tj -332.64 -23.52 TD 0.0061 Tc -0.0375 Tw (the SAB in conjunction with the MAPA provided a functional means of identification of ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD -0.0163 Tc -0.0837 Tw (children ) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.002 Tc 0.142 Tw (with auditory processing problems ) Tj 141.6 0 TD -0.0276 Tc 0.1676 Tw (needing attention for \(C\)APD. In her study, ) Tj -176.64 -23.52 TD 0.0138 Tc 0.1262 Tw (she identified ) Tj 56.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1533 Tc 0.2267 Tw (1.5 ) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.39 Tc 0 Tw (SD) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0.0019 Tc 0.0181 Tw ( as providing the best \223fail\224 cutoff for identification) Tj 206.4 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0.25 Tw ( of children ) Tj -294.24 -22.56 TD -0.0208 Tc 0.0168 Tw (with, or at risk for, \(C\)APD.) Tj 113.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0184 Tc 0.0384 Tw (Summers recommended using failure \() Tj 155.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0057 Tc -0.0943 Tw (SD\) of one or more ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD 0 Tc -0.2206 Tw (subtests of the MAPA ) Tj 90.72 0 TD 0.0308 Tc -0.1308 Tw (and a "fail" on the checklist ) Tj 113.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0555 Tc -0.1555 Tw (as requiring) Tj 47.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1283 Tc 0 Tw (follow) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0193 Tc 0.1593 Tw (up/treatment for ) Tj -286.08 -23.04 TD 0.0243 Tc 0 Tw (\(C\)APD.) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -40.32 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0.4 Tw (Hybrid Screening Solution) Tj 107.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD ( ) Tj -132.48 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (Because) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.0754 Tc 0.0954 Tw ( the SCAN does no) Tj 76.8 0 TD -0.0014 Tc -0.0026 Tw (t include all three auditory domains \(APTO, BIBS, MSC\), we ) Tj -110.4 -22.56 TD 0.0119 Tc -0.0799 Tw (think it cannot be proposed for screening without adding other tests. We have listed a ) Tj 0 -23.52 TD -0.0115 Tc 0.0075 Tw (series of tests in Table ) Tj 91.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0082 Tc -0.0602 Tw ( that are within the three domains mentioned, and have ) Tj -105.12 -22.56 TD -0.0026 Tc -0.0974 Tw (indicated which of these ha) Tj 109.44 0 TD -0.0065 Tc -0.0249 Tw (ve undergone factor analysis to determine the c) Tj 188.64 0 TD -0.0067 Tc 0 Tw (ontent) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.02 Tc 0.12 Tw ( validity ) Tj -323.04 -23.04 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.1106 Tw (\(Chermak & Schow, 1997; Conlin, 2003; Domitz & Schow, 2000; Shiffman, 1999; ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (Summers, 2003) Tj 63.36 0 TD -0.38 Tc -0.2 Tw (; ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.109 Tc 0 Tw (Neijenhuis) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.088 Tc -0.188 Tw (, et al, 2000) Tj 47.52 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\). ) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.08 Tc 0.14 Tw ( With ) Tj 26.88 0 TD -0.1171 Tc 0 Tw (Summers) Tj 37.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.28 Tc (2003) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.38 Tc -0.2 Tw (; ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0133 Tc 0.3933 Tw (and ) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.1017 Tc 0 Tw (Conlin) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc (, ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.28 Tc (2003) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.08 Tc (\227) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 107 0 obj 5632 endobj 105 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 106 0 R >> endobj 109 0 obj << /Length 110 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (30) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (30) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD 0.0155 Tc -0.0355 Tw (and in our most recent work ) Tj 114.72 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0119 Tc -0.0519 Tw (he present authors have identified a set of ) Tj 168.96 0 TD 0.11 Tc 0 Tw (six) Tj 11.52 0 TD 0.0378 Tc 0.0222 Tw ( tests that ) Tj -298.08 -22.56 TD -0 Tc 0.0281 Tw (represent each domain, with two tests per area that both strongly factor together, and are ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.007 Tc -0.0633 Tw (readily available as components of the Multiple Auditory Processing Assessment Battery ) Tj T* 0.0656 Tc -0.1656 Tw (\(Schow et al., 2006) Tj 78.24 0 TD -0.0213 Tc 0.0241 Tw (\). All six can be given in about 25 minutes and so we propose ) Tj -78.24 -23.04 TD 0.0115 Tc -0.1115 Tw (screening using all six tests. ) Tj 114.24 0 TD 0.0286 Tc -0.1286 Tw (It is feasible that at some ) Tj 102.24 0 TD -0.002 Tc -0.098 Tw (later ) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.012 Tc -0.0434 Tw (time only one test will be used ) Tj -236.64 -23.04 TD 0.085 Tc -0.185 Tw (in each domain) Tj 60.96 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0009 Tc -0.1009 Tw ( which will cut the screening time in half.) Tj 166.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 10.08 0 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD ( ) Tj -270.24 -34.56 TD ( ) Tj 30.24 0 TD -0.042 Tc -0.058 Tw (Because the) Tj 48 0 TD -0.028 Tc 0.048 Tw ( MAPA has not ) Tj 64.8 0 TD -0.0733 Tc -0.0267 Tw (yet ) Tj 14.4 0 TD 0.084 Tc -0.184 Tw (been t) Tj 24 0 TD 0.0168 Tc -0.1168 Tw (ested on individuals with confirmed ) Tj 146.4 0 TD 0.0771 Tc 0.3029 Tw (lesions ) Tj -327.84 -23.52 TD 0.032 Tc 0.108 Tw (in the ) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.1725 Tc 0 Tw (CANS) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.38 Tc (, ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0097 Tc -0.0697 Tw (we are unable at present to precisely define sensitivity and specificity in ) Tj -56.64 -22.56 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (each of the three areas) Tj 89.28 0 TD 0.0807 Tc -0.1807 Tw ( physiologically) Tj 63.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.07 Tc 0.21 Tw (This may e) Tj 44.64 0 TD -0.0127 Tc -0.0873 Tw (ventually be possible and ) Tj 103.2 0 TD 0.305 Tc -0.405 Tw (if ) Tj 9.12 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.2933 Tw (the ) Tj -315.36 -23.04 TD 0.0367 Tc -0.1367 Tw (sensitivity is adequate in all three ar) Tj 143.52 0 TD 0.2233 Tc 0 Tw (eas) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.0323 Tc 0.0523 Tw ( \(and with reasonable specificity\),) Tj 135.36 0 TD 0.0392 Tc -0.1392 Tw ( this screening ) Tj -291.84 -23.04 TD 0.0357 Tc 0.3443 Tw (process ) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.0244 Tc -0.0756 Tw (can then be ) Tj 48 0 TD 0.0037 Tc -0.1037 Tw (determined to be efficient i) Tj 108 0 TD 0.0809 Tc -0.1809 Tw (n that manner) Tj 55.2 0 TD -0 Tc 0.0605 Tw (. In the meantime, we have ) Tj -243.84 -23.04 TD 0.0073 Tc -0.1073 Tw (chosen to use) Tj 54.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0228 Tc -0.0772 Tw (outliers from normative data) Tj 113.76 0 TD -0.0036 Tc 0.0236 Tw ( \(a common method used to diagnose language ) Tj -170.4 -23.04 TD -0.015 Tc 0 Tw (disorders\)) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.04 Tc 0.1 Tw ( on ) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.0185 Tc -0.1185 Tw (multiple tests) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0.0084 Tc -0.1084 Tw ( in the same domain area ) Tj 101.76 0 TD 0.0633 Tc -0.1633 Tw (as a) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.0363 Tc -0.0637 Tw (n interim) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0675 Tc 0 Tw (step) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.0327 Tc 0.0927 Tw (, recognizing the ) Tj -280.8 -23.04 TD 0.0102 Tc -0.0417 Tw (limitations of such an approach \(e.g., see Spaulding) Tj 206.4 0 TD 0.164 Tc -0.264 Tw ( et al.) Tj 22.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.23 Tc -0.33 Tw ( 2006\)) Tj 26.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -231.84 -34.56 TD 0.0065 Tc -0.0696 Tw (Our strategy is to form a hypothesis about failure within each of the ) Tj 273.12 0 TD -0.062 Tc 0 Tw (three) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.0414 Tc 0.4214 Tw ( domains) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -359.52 -23.04 TD 0.0294 Tc -0.1294 Tw (based on the two tests and comparative nor) Tj 172.32 0 TD -0.0222 Tc -0.0778 Tw (ms for same) Tj 48.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0293 Tc -0.0707 Tw (aged children. A ) Tj 68.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.05 Tc (C) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0533 Tc 0.3267 Tw (APD ) Tj -306.72 -23.04 TD 0.0119 Tc -0.0319 Tw (screening result will be based on the number of tests within the ) Tj 254.88 0 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (domain) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.045 Tw ( \(1 or 2\) for which ) Tj -284.64 -23.04 TD -0.0337 Tc 0.0297 Tw (there are reduced scores \(two SD) Tj 132 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0 Tc 0.0603 Tw ( below the mean\) and the number of total ) Tj 168 0 TD -0.0414 Tc -0.0586 Tw (domains ) Tj 36 0 TD 0.23 Tc 0 Tw (\(1,) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -350.88 -22.56 TD 0.33 Tc 0 Tw (2,) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.085 Tc -0.495 Tw (3\) ) Tj 10.56 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (that) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.0514 Tc -0.1514 Tw ( show low scores. ) Tj 73.92 0 TD 0.16 Tc 0 Tw (W) Tj 9.6 0 TD -0.0642 Tc -0.0358 Tw (hen the parent) Tj 56.16 0 TD 0.0267 Tc -0.1267 Tw ( or teacher ) Tj 44.64 0 TD 0.0089 Tc -0.0289 Tw (response \(both types of input are ) Tj -219.84 -23.52 TD -0.0383 Tc -0.5417 Tw (recommended\) ) Tj 61.92 0 TD 0.114 Tc 0.026 Tw (of the ) Tj 25.92 0 TD -0.0833 Tc -0.0167 Tw (SAB ) Tj 22.08 0 TD -0.0092 Tc -0.0908 Tw (questionnaire ) Tj 56.16 0 TD -0.014 Tc 0 Tw (reinforces) Tj 39.84 0 TD -0.0146 Tc -0.0854 Tw ( the behavioral ) Tj 61.92 0 TD 0.1275 Tc -0.2275 Tw (test ) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.0175 Tc 0 Tw (findings) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0686 Tc 0.0714 Tw (or there ) Tj -322.08 -22.56 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw (is ) Tj 9.12 0 TD -0.0023 Tc -0.0977 Tw (comorbidity in ) Tj 61.92 0 TD -0.5 Tc 0 Tw (AD) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.02 Tc (H) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.1225 Tc 0.0225 Tw (D, LD) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0.0173 Tc -0.1173 Tw (, reading, autism) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.395 Tc 0 Tw (or) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.2 Tc 0.18 Tw ( S) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (/) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.055 Tc (LD) Tj 13.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.027 Tc -0.127 Tw (we consider there is an i) Tj 96.96 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (ncreased ) Tj -324 -23.52 TD 0.0614 Tc 0 Tw (urgency) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0933 Tw ( but the ) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0.051 Tc -0.151 Tw (behavioral ) Tj 45.12 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (test ) Tj 16.32 0 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (sc) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.035 Tc (ores) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw ( alone are used) Tj 59.52 0 TD 0.155 Tc -0.255 Tw ( as ) Tj 13.44 0 TD -0.0182 Tc 0.0782 Tw (the basis for ) Tj 51.36 0 TD 0.017 Tc 0 Tw (diagnostic) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0.0267 Tc 0.2467 Tw ( referral. ) Tj ET endstream endobj 110 0 obj 7283 endobj 108 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 93 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 109 0 R >> endobj 113 0 obj << /Length 114 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (31) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (31) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw (We recommend that t) Tj 85.92 0 TD 0.0975 Tc 0.2825 Tw (hose ) Tj 21.12 0 TD 0.0129 Tc -0.0329 Tw (with \223fail\224 questionnaire scores but no ) Tj 156.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.045 Tc 0.105 Tw (SD behavioral test ) Tj -275.04 -22.56 TD -0.03 Tc -0.07 Tw (problem ) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.16 Tc 0 Tw (be) Tj 9.12 0 TD 0.0016 Tc 0.0184 Tw ( followed and retested ) Tj 91.2 0 TD 0.0487 Tc 0.0113 Tw (again in one year.) Tj 71.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -209.76 -35.04 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0271 Tc 0.0871 Tw (Normative Data for Behavioral and Questionnaire Instru) Tj 225.6 0 TD -0.074 Tc 0 Tw (ments) Tj 24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -267.84 -34.56 TD 0.0244 Tc -0.1244 Tw (Following Musiek and Chermak \(1994\), ) Tj 164.16 0 TD -0.0137 Tc -0.0863 Tw (Domitz and Schow \(2000\) examined the utility ) Tj -164.16 -23.04 TD 0.1157 Tc -0.2157 Tw (of a four) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0022 Tc 0 Tw (test battery to screen for \(C\)APD, based upon the ASHA \(1996\) criteria for the ) Tj -37.44 -23.04 TD 0.0076 Tc -0.1076 Tw (disorder. The authors screened 81 children using ) Tj 196.8 0 TD 0.013 Tc -0.113 Tw (two questionnaires, four behav) Tj 123.36 0 TD 0.037 Tc -0.137 Tw (ioral tests) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -359.04 -22.56 TD -0.0483 Tc 0 Tw (\(i.e.,) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.003 Tc 0.063 Tw ( SAAT, PP, DD) Tj 64.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.234 Tc -0.334 Tw ( and CS) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0.0533 Tw ( the ) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.0243 Tc -0.1243 Tw (SCAN and) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0867 Tc -0.1867 Tw (the ) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.0489 Tc 0.1889 Tw (Auditory Fusion Test) Tj 84.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0508 Tc 0.0892 Tw (Revised \(1000 ) Tj -288.96 -23.52 TD 0.049 Tc -0.149 Tw (and 4000 Hz\)) Tj 54.24 0 TD 0.0531 Tc -0.1531 Tw ( \(Keith, 2000a,) Tj 60.48 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2000) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.085 Tc -0.015 Tw (b\) ) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.0098 Tc -0.1098 Tw ( Seventeen of the 81 children failed the screening on ) Tj -147.84 -22.56 TD 0.028 Tc -0.032 Tw (at least one of the ) Tj 72.96 0 TD 0.155 Tc 0 Tw (four) Tj 16.8 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.096 Tw ( tests) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.047 Tw ( and were on this basis assumed to have CAP) Tj 181.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw (D \(this was our ) Tj -291.36 -23.52 TD -0.0091 Tc -0.0909 Tw (preliminary ) Tj 48.96 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (gold standard) Tj 56.64 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\)) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0135 Tc -0.0865 Tw (. Shiffman \(1999\) re) Tj 81.12 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0225 Tc -0.0425 Tw (examined 7 of the original 17 ) Tj 120.48 0 TD 0.0425 Tc 0.3375 Tw (students ) Tj -313.92 -22.56 TD 0.02 Tc 0.36 Tw (who ) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (failed ) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.0233 Tc -0.1233 Tw (using the same ) Tj 62.4 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (four ) Tj 19.2 0 TD -0.004 Tc 0 Tw (tests) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.0187 Tc -0.1187 Tw (, as well as 12 children identified as not having ) Tj -144 -23.04 TD 0.0243 Tc 0 Tw (\(C\)APD.) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.023 Tc -0.0357 Tw ( Shiffman's goal was to determine the degree to which the ) Tj 234.72 0 TD -0.565 Tc 0 Tw (fo) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.395 Tc (ur) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.024 Tc -0.124 Tw (battery screener ) Tj -292.32 -23.04 TD -0.0278 Tc -0.0722 Tw (predicted ) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.0072 Tc -0.2272 Tw (later findings suggestive of ) Tj 110.88 0 TD 0.0212 Tc -0.1212 Tw (\(C\)APD identified ) Tj 76.8 0 TD 0.47 Tc 0 Tw (at) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.07 Tc -0.17 Tw ( retest) Tj 24.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.04 Tc 0 Tw (two) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.001 Tc 0.139 Tw ( years later) Tj 43.68 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.125 Tc 0.025 Tw (This ) Tj -325.44 -23.04 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.1133 Tw (study supported the hybrid \(behavioral test/questionnaire\) approach) Tj 270.24 0 TD 0.0277 Tc -0.1277 Tw ( and resulted in ) Tj 64.32 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw (good ) Tj -334.56 -23.04 TD -0.0411 Tc -0.0589 Tw (agreement ) Tj 44.16 0 TD 0.0367 Tc 0 Tw (\(83) Tj 13.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.225 Tc (85%\)) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.1133 Tw ( using the original findings as the stan) Tj 151.2 0 TD -0.0025 Tc 0 Tw (dard) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.014 Tc 0.0511 Tw ( In the next phase of this ) Tj -254.4 -23.04 TD 0.0225 Tc 0 Tw (work) Tj 20.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.1 Tc -0.2 Tw ( t) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.08 Tc 0.3 Tw (he ) Tj 12 0 TD 0.505 Tc 0 Tw (si) Tj 7.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc (x) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.5875 Tw (test ) Tj 16.32 0 TD 0.0285 Tc -0.1285 Tw (MAPA was normed ) Tj 83.04 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (by ) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.1171 Tc 0.0171 Tw (Summers ) Tj 39.84 0 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.0533 Tw (for ) Tj 13.92 0 TD 0.0278 Tc -0.0478 Tw (the age groupings from 8 through ) Tj -220.8 -23.04 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (11 years, inclusive, and include) Tj 126.24 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0273 Tc -0.1273 Tw ( 119 subjects) Tj 52.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0019 Tc -0.0981 Tw (There were 14 \(12%\) found to have ) Tj -188.64 -23.04 TD -0.0119 Tc -0.0881 Tw (performance poorer than ) Tj 101.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1375 Tc 0.0375 Tw (2 SDs) Tj 24 0 TD 0.0177 Tc -0.0492 Tw ( on one or more of these test) Tj 113.76 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.105 Tc (Test) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0126 Tc 0.0726 Tw (retest reliability of ) Tj -271.68 -22.56 TD -0.0023 Tc -0.0291 Tw (the MAPA for 19 children in the 8) Tj 138.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.235 Tc -0.335 Tw ( to 11) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1375 Tc (year) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.22 Tc (old) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.0255 Tc 0.0455 Tw ( age range was ) Tj 61.44 0 TD 0.0525 Tc 0.3275 Tw (also ) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.0175 Tc -0.1175 Tw (determined by ) Tj -280.8 -23.52 TD 0.0277 Tc -0.1277 Tw (Summers \(2003\)) Tj 67.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.28 Tc 0 Tw (PP) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (=) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 0) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0217 Tc -0.1217 Tw (.91, CS) Tj 29.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (=) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 0) Tj 7.68 0 TD -0.11 Tc 0.01 Tw (.86, TAP) Tj 36.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (=) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 0) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0533 Tc -0.1533 Tw (.77, DD) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.36 Tc -0.22 Tw (= ) Tj 7.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0525 Tc -0.1525 Tw (.73, MSAT) Tj 45.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (=) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 0) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw (.67, SINCA) Tj 47.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -352.8 -22.56 TD 0.12 Tc 0 Tw (=) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 0) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.1225 Tc 0 Tw (.50\)) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.06 Tc 0.2 Tw ( and p) Tj 24 0 TD -0.0147 Tc -0.0853 Tw (reliminary norms for 1) Tj 90.72 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (2) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1375 Tc (year) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0523 Tc -0.1523 Tw (olds and adults ) Tj 62.88 0 TD 0.0525 Tc 0.3275 Tw (also ) Tj 18.72 0 TD -0.0081 Tc -0.0919 Tw (were established. ) Tj 71.04 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0.41 Tw (Two ) Tj -325.44 -23.52 TD -0.058 Tc -0.042 Tw (forms ) Tj 25.44 0 TD -0.002 Tc 0.142 Tw (\(A & B\)) Tj 33.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0138 Tc -0.1138 Tw (of the MAPA are available \(Conlin, 2003\). Form equivalency range) Tj 271.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.06 Tc 0.2 Tw ( from ) Tj ET endstream endobj 114 0 obj 8587 endobj 111 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 113 0 R >> endobj 116 0 obj << /Length 117 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (32) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (32) Tj -349.92 558.24 TD -0.0068 Tc 0.0268 Tw (moderate for the MSC tests) Tj 109.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc (.46\)) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0906 Tw ( to high for the BIBS ) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.2 Tc (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (.81\) ) Tj 18.24 0 TD -0.0608 Tc 0.2008 Tw (and APTO tests) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc -0.13 Tw ( \() Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.2425 Tc (.90\)) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.2667 Tc 0.4067 Tw (. An ) Tj -339.84 -22.56 TD 0.014 Tc 0.046 Tw (overall correlation coefficient \() Tj 124.32 0 TD 0.0129 Tc -0.1129 Tw (for the three areas combined) Tj 114.24 0 TD -0.0467 Tc -0.0533 Tw (\) of ) Tj 16.32 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (0) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0088 Tc -0.1088 Tw (.79 revealed strong ) Tj -260.16 -23.04 TD -0.0085 Tc -0.0915 Tw (interform equivalency ) Tj 90.72 0 TD 0.0361 Tc -0.1361 Tw (for the total battery) Tj 76.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0 Tc -0.0993 Tw (The SAB \(Appendix ) Tj 84.96 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (A) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.1 Tc (;) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0111 Tc 0.0489 Tw ( Schow et al) Tj 49.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.175 Tc -0.275 Tw (, 2006\) ) Tj -319.68 -23.04 TD 0.0141 Tc -0.1141 Tw (was developed as a questionnaire to be used in conjunction with the behavioral screening ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0044 Tc -0.1044 Tw (process. Conlin provided norms \(Appendix ) Tj 175.2 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (6) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.02 Tc (A) Tj 6.72 0 TD -0.035 Tc (\).) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0417 Tc 0.3383 Tw (The que) Tj 32.64 0 TD 0.0144 Tc 0.0056 Tw (stionnaire is used to ) Tj 82.08 0 TD -0.1029 Tc 0 Tw (support) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -345.6 -23.04 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw (findings of the ) Tj 60.48 0 TD 0.11 Tc 0 Tw (six) Tj 12 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0091 Tc -0.1091 Tw (test battery) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.38 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 5.76 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0.16 Tw (Thus, the ) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.0277 Tc 0 Tw (questionnaire) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0.0221 Tc -0.1221 Tw ( score can be used to determine the ) Tj -218.4 -23.04 TD -0.0275 Tc 0 Tw (real) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0061 Tc -0.0375 Tw (world impact of a potential deficit on an individual, and the behavioral test results ) Tj -18.24 -23.04 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (can provide information about domain \(APTO) Tj 185.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.16 Tc (MSC) Tj 21.12 0 TD -0.0081 Tc -0.0919 Tw (, BIBS\) and severity \(number of ) Tj -211.68 -23.04 TD -0.007 Tc 0.003 Tw (domains in which subject is deficient\)) Tj 151.68 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -154.08 -34.56 TD 0.04 Tc 0 Tw (/H) Tj 10.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc (1) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc (/) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0245 Tc -0.0755 Tw (Summary and Conclusion) Tj 103.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -121.44 -23.52 TD -0.0425 Tc 0 Tw (Although) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.0329 Tw ( the ability to accurately identify children and adults who have \(C\)APD remains ) Tj -37.44 -22.56 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (limited by ) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0.0867 Tc 0 Tw (the) Tj 12.48 0 TD -0.022 Tc 0.114 Tw ( nature of the disorder, headway has been made in ) Tj 203.04 0 TD 0.0181 Tc -0.1181 Tw (description of the ) Tj -258.24 -23.52 TD -0.0155 Tc -0.0845 Tw (disorder and ) Tj 51.84 0 TD -0.0075 Tc 0.0675 Tw (in factor study of relevant tests ) Tj 126.24 0 TD 0.1433 Tc -0.2433 Tw (\(ASHA 1996) Tj 53.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.08 Tc -0.02 Tw ( 2005) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.0385 Tc -0.0615 Tw (; Chermak, 2001) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.0471 Tc -0.0529 Tw (; Jerger ) Tj -323.52 -22.56 TD 0.0567 Tc -0.1567 Tw (& Musiek, 2000) Tj 65.76 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (; Schow et al) Tj 50.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.204 Tc -0.304 Tw (, 2006) Tj 25.92 0 TD -0.0058 Tc 0.0125 Tw (\). In this chapter we have clarified the characteristics ) Tj -145.44 -23.04 TD 0.0189 Tc -0.0389 Tw (of \(C\)APD and condensed them into ) Tj 148.8 0 TD 0.034 Tc 0.346 Tw (three ) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.004 Tc -0.336 Tw (currently useful ) Tj 65.28 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (do) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.0168 Tc -0.1168 Tw (mains, as supported by ) Tj -246.72 -23.04 TD -0.0098 Tc 0.0844 Tw (factor analysis results on over 300 children. We have provided summaries ) Tj 298.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (o) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.088 Tc -0.012 Tw (f some ) Tj -303.84 -23.04 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw (behavioral instruments ) Tj 93.6 0 TD 0.0483 Tc 0.0917 Tw (used to ) Tj 31.2 0 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (sc) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.0175 Tc (reen) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.018 Tc -0.118 Tw (these ) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.0337 Tc -0.1337 Tw (auditory ) Tj 36 0 TD -0.0414 Tc 0 Tw (domains) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0462 Tc -0.1462 Tw ( and using ) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.11 Tc 0 Tw (six) Tj 11.52 0 TD 0.0811 Tc -0.0851 Tw ( of them in a ) Tj -303.36 -23.04 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.0625 Tw (hybrid approach we found a 12% referral rate on 119 school chil) Tj 258.72 0 TD -0.1225 Tc 0 Tw (dren) Tj 17.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0043 Tc 0.2157 Tw (Finally, we have ) Tj -280.8 -22.56 TD -0.0073 Tc 0.0873 Tw (provided a questionnaire \(SAB\) that holds promise to ) Tj 216.48 0 TD 0.0096 Tc -0.1096 Tw (contextualize the behavioral ) Tj -216.48 -23.52 TD -0.0175 Tc 0.3975 Tw (findings ) Tj 35.04 0 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (and ) Tj 16.8 0 TD 0.19 Tc 0.19 Tw (to ) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.0192 Tc -0.1192 Tw (be used as an outcome measure) Tj 125.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0008 Tc -0.0048 Tw ( after the diagnostic process, ) Tj 116.64 0 TD 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (if ) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.0333 Tc -0.1333 Tw (therapy is ) Tj -315.84 -22.56 TD -0.01 Tc -0.09 Tw (indicated and completed. ) Tj 105.12 0 TD -0.072 Tc -0.028 Tw (These ) Tj 26.4 0 TD -0.0163 Tc 0 Tw (material) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.075 Tc -0.025 Tw (s, ) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.005 Tc 0 Tw (although) Tj 35.04 0 TD 0.0287 Tc -0.1287 Tw ( experime) Tj 40.32 0 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (ntal) Tj 14.88 0 TD -0.0018 Tc -0.0022 Tw (, provide a basis for ) Tj 81.6 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0.02 Tw (a ) Tj -344.64 -23.04 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (battery ) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0622 Tc 0 Tw (screening) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.0079 Tc -0.1079 Tw ( approach until m) Tj 69.6 0 TD -0.0021 Tc 0.0621 Tw (ore basic and clinical research is ) Tj 132.48 0 TD -0 Tc 0 Tw (completed.) Tj 44.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 117 0 obj 7032 endobj 115 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 116 0 R >> endobj 119 0 obj << /Length 120 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (33) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD (3) Tj -221.76 558.24 TD 0.0575 Tc (/RH/) Tj 19.2 0 TD -0.026 Tc (References) Tj 44.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -226.56 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -11.04 TD -0.0793 Tc 0.4593 Tw (American Speech) Tj 70.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0688 Tc (Language) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0332 Tc -0.1332 Tw (Hearing Association. ) Tj 87.36 0 TD 0.134 Tc 0 Tw (\(1996) Tj 24 0 TD -0.0063 Tc -0.0937 Tw (\). Central auditory processing: Current ) Tj -197.76 -23.04 TD -0.0242 Tc -0.0758 Tw (status of research and implications fo) Tj 148.8 0 TD -0.0378 Tc 0.1778 Tw (r clinical practice. ) Tj 77.28 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (American Journal of Audiology, ) Tj -226.08 -23.04 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (5) Tj 5.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0533 Tc -0.1533 Tw (\(2\), 41) Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.3133 Tc (54.) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -77.76 -23.04 TD -0.0793 Tc 0.4593 Tw (American Speech) Tj 70.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.0688 Tc (Language) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0332 Tc -0.1332 Tw (Hearing Association. ) Tj 87.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0209 Tc -0.1209 Tw (2005\). \(Central\) auditory processing ) Tj -176.64 -23.04 TD -0.02 Tc -0.08 Tw (disorders ) Tj 38.88 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\226) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.008 Tc -0.0394 Tw ( The role of the audiologist. Position Statement of the Working Group on ) Tj -44.16 -23.04 TD -0.0133 Tc -0.0867 Tw (Auditory Processing ) Tj 84 0 TD 0.015 Tc 0.125 Tw (Disorders of the American Speech) Tj 138.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0512 Tc (Language) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0079 Tc 0.1321 Tw (Hearing Association. ) Tj -267.84 -23.04 TD -0.0675 Tc 0.2075 Tw (Rockville, MD: Author.) Tj 95.52 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -125.28 -23.04 TD -0.0089 Tc -0.0911 Tw (Amos, N. E.) Tj 49.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0104 Tc -0.0504 Tw ( & Hume, L. E. \(1998\). SCAN test) Tj 141.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0192 Tc 0.0408 Tw (retest reliability for first) Tj 96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0337 Tc -0.1337 Tw ( and third) Tj 38.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.026 Tc 0.406 Tw (grade ) Tj -308.16 -22.56 TD -0.0256 Tc -0.0744 Tw (children. ) Tj 39.84 0 TD /F2 10 Tf 0.054 Tc -0.154 Tw (Journal of Speech ) Tj 79.68 0 TD -0.0933 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.0239 Tc 0.0361 Tw ( Hearing Research, 41) Tj 95.04 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(4\), 834) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc (846.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -312.48 -23.52 TD -0.0644 Tc -0.0356 Tw (Anderson, ) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (K) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0067 Tc 0.1333 Tw (. L. \(19) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (89) Tj 10.56 0 TD -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0406 Tc -0.2366 Tw (Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk.) Tj 216 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0336 Tc 0.1736 Tw (Upper Saddle ) Tj -291.84 -22.56 TD -0.0233 Tc -0.0767 Tw (River, NJ: ) Tj 43.68 0 TD -0.0066 Tc 0.0986 Tw (Interstate Printers and Publishers. ) Tj 139.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -212.64 -23.52 TD -0.0075 Tc 0.1475 Tw (Anderson, K. L) Tj 61.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.,) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0237 Tc 0.0837 Tw ( & Smaldino, J. \(n.d.\). ) Tj 94.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0311 Tc -0.0511 Tw (Children\222s Home Inventory for Learning Difficulties ) Tj -131.04 -22.56 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\(CHILD\). ) Tj 41.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0356 Tc 0.1756 Tw (St\344fa, Switzerland: ) Tj 78.24 0 TD -0.0667 Tc 0 Tw (Pho) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.0228 Tc 0.0828 Tw (nak Hearing Systems, ) Tj 89.76 0 TD 0.0333 Tc 0 Tw (http://www.phonak.com) Tj 97.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -357.6 -23.04 TD 0.0044 Tc -0.1044 Tw (Bellis, T. J. \(2003\). ) Tj 82.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0346 Tc -0.2031 Tw (Central Auditory Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting) Tj 264.96 0 TD -0.022 Tc -0.078 Tw (: From ) Tj -317.28 -23.04 TD 0.0447 Tc -0.1447 Tw (Science to Practice ) Tj 80.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (\() Tj 2.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 4.8 0 TD (nd) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (e) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.2 Tc (d) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.065 Tc (\)/) Tj 6.24 0 TD 0.0214 Tc -0.0528 Tw ( Clifton Park, NY: Thomson) Tj 121.44 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0287 Tc 0.4087 Tw (Delmar Learning.) Tj 71.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -344.16 -23.04 TD -0.0236 Tc -0.0764 Tw (Cacace, A. T.) Tj 54.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0186 Tc -0.0226 Tw ( & McFarland, D. J. \(1998\).) Tj 112.32 0 TD 0.0058 Tc -0.0098 Tw ( Central auditory processing in school age children: ) Tj -139.2 -23.04 TD 0.0062 Tc -0.1062 Tw (A critical review. ) Tj 74.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0313 Tc -0.3713 Tw (Journal of Speech) Tj 72.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.04 Tc (Language) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (Hearing Research, 41) Tj 88.32 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.175 Tc 0.075 Tw (, 355) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (373.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -352.8 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD -0.0226 Tc 0.0703 Tw (Chermak, G. D. \(1996\). Central testing. In Gerber, S. E. \(Ed.\), ) Tj 256.32 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0686 Tc -0.2886 Tw (The handbook of pediatric ) Tj -226.56 -23.04 TD 0.0889 Tc 0 Tw (audiology) Tj 40.32 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0529 Tc -0.1529 Tw ( \(pp. 206) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.2175 Tc (253\)) Tj 18.24 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0525 Tc -0.0475 Tw ( Wash) Tj 27.36 0 TD 0.0229 Tc -0.1229 Tw (ington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.) Tj 162.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -319.2 -22.56 TD -0.0128 Tc 0.0408 Tw (Chermak, G. D. \(2001\). Auditory processing disorder: An overview for the clinician. ) Tj 349.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.12 Tc 0.26 Tw (The ) Tj -319.68 -23.52 TD 0.0482 Tc -0.1482 Tw (Hearing Journal, 54) Tj 82.56 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0533 Tc -0.1533 Tw (\(7\), 10) Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.3133 Tc (21.) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 120 0 obj 6769 endobj 118 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R /F2 18 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 119 0 R >> endobj 122 0 obj << /Length 123 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (34) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (34) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD -0.0433 Tc -0.0567 Tw (Chermak, G. D.) Tj 62.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0243 Tc 0.0843 Tw ( & Lee, J. \(2005\). ) Tj 75.84 0 TD 0.0152 Tc -0.1752 Tw (Comparison of children's performance on four tests of ) Tj -111.84 -22.56 TD -0.08 Tc 0 Tw (temp) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.034 Tc -0.134 Tw (oral resolution. ) Tj 65.76 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0383 Tc -0.1383 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 16) Tj 206.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(8\), 554) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (563.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -373.92 -23.04 TD -0.0433 Tc -0.0567 Tw (Chermak, G. D.) Tj 62.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0104 Tc -0.0734 Tw ( & Musiek, F. E. \(1997\). Central auditory processing disorders: New ) Tj -36 -23.04 TD -0.0126 Tc 0.0326 Tw (Perspectives. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.) Tj 234.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -264 -23.04 TD 0.0073 Tc -0.1073 Tw (Chermak, G. D., Somers, E. K., &) Tj 136.8 0 TD -0.0032 Tc -0.0532 Tw ( Seikel, J. A. \(1998\). Behavioral signs of central auditory ) Tj -107.04 -23.04 TD -0.0083 Tc 0.0283 Tw (processing disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. ) Tj 258.24 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0605 Tc -0.0405 Tw (Journal of the American ) Tj -258.24 -23.04 TD 0.004 Tc -0.104 Tw (Academy of Audiology, 9) Tj 100.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0533 Tc -0.1533 Tw (\(1\), 78) Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1667 Tc (84.) Tj 12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -172.8 -23.04 TD -0.095 Tc -0.005 Tw (Chermak, ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.124 Tc 0.016 Tw (G. D., ) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.1667 Tc 0 Tw (Styers) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.0229 Tc 0.1171 Tw (, S. A., & ) Tj 40.8 0 TD 0.0733 Tc 0 Tw (Seikel) Tj 24.48 0 TD 0.118 Tc -0.218 Tw (, J. A. ) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.1167 Tc 0 Tw (\(1995\)) Tj 27.36 0 TD -0.0538 Tc -0.0462 Tw ( Study compares) Tj 68.64 0 TD 0.0017 Tc -0.1017 Tw ( screening tests of central ) Tj -251.04 -23.04 TD -0.0189 Tc -0.0811 Tw (auditory processing. ) Tj 85.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.083 Tc -0.183 Tw (The Hearing Journal, 48) Tj 100.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0533 Tc -0.1533 Tw (\(5\), 29) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.3133 Tc (33.) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -258.24 -22.56 TD -0.0575 Tc -0.0425 Tw (Cherry, R) Tj 38.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0857 Tc -0.0257 Tw ( \(1980\). ) Tj 37.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.0081 Tc -0.0919 Tw (Selective Auditory Attention Test \(SAAT\).) Tj 165.6 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0667 Tc 0.2867 Tw ( St. Louis, ) Tj 43.68 0 TD -0.0567 Tc -0.0433 Tw (MO: ) Tj 21.6 0 TD -0.0758 Tc 0.1358 Tw (Auditec of St. ) Tj -282.24 -23.52 TD 0.1067 Tc 0 Tw (Louis.) Tj 25.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -55.2 -22.56 TD 0.0082 Tc -0.1082 Tw (Cherry, R. \(1992\). Screening and evaluation of central auditory proces) Tj 284.16 0 TD 0.0145 Tc -0.1145 Tw (sing disorders in young ) Tj -254.4 -23.52 TD -0.0364 Tc 0.0964 Tw (children. In ) Tj 50.88 0 TD -0.075 Tc -0.025 Tw (J. ) Tj 8.64 0 TD 0.044 Tc 0.336 Tw (Katz, ) Tj 24 0 TD -0.06 Tc -0.04 Tw (N. ) Tj 12.48 0 TD -0.0478 Tc -0.2922 Tw (Stecker, & ) Tj 45.12 0 TD -0.06 Tc -0.04 Tw (D. ) Tj 12 0 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.1133 Tw (Henderson \(Eds.\)) Tj 70.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0914 Tc -0.1914 Tw (Central ) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (uditory ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0227 Tc -0.2373 Tw (rocessing: A ) Tj -303.36 -22.56 TD 0.0176 Tc -0.1176 Tw (transdisciplinary ) Tj 71.04 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (v) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.17 Tc (iew) Tj 13.92 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0157 Tc -0.0843 Tw ( \(pp. 129) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0975 Tc (140\)) Tj 18.24 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1225 Tc 0.1825 Tw ( St. Louis) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0.1233 Tc 0.0233 Tw (, MO) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.048 Tc -0.148 Tw (: Mosby Year Book.) Tj 84.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -325.44 -23.04 TD -0.0643 Tc -0.0357 Tw (Conlin, ) Tj 32.16 0 TD -0.0367 Tc 0.0967 Tw (L. \(2003\). ) Tj 45.12 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0436 Tc -0.2036 Tw (Form equivalency on the Beta III version of Multip) Tj 204.96 0 TD 0.035 Tc -0.135 Tw (le Auditory Processing ) Tj -252.48 -23.04 TD -0.0147 Tc -0.0853 Tw (Assessment \(MAPA\). ) Tj 85.92 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0173 Tc 0.1231 Tw ( Master\222s thesis, 糖心传媒, Pocatello, ID.) Tj 217.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -333.6 -23.04 TD 0.0583 Tc 0 Tw (Dawson) Tj 32.64 0 TD -0.05 Tc -0.05 Tw (, B.) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0114 Tc 0.1514 Tw (& Trapp, ) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.068 Tc -0.168 Tw (R. G. \() Tj 26.88 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (2004) Tj 21.12 0 TD -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0875 Tc 0.0525 Tw (Basic and ) Tj 42.72 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0514 Tc -0.1514 Tw (linical ) Tj 27.84 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (b) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0058 Tc (iostatistics) Tj 42.72 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.085 Tc -0.015 Tw ( \(4) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.19 Tc 0 Tw (th) Tj 7.68 0 TD -0.0975 Tc -0.0025 Tw ( ed.\)) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.0271 Tc -0.1271 Tw (. New York: Lange ) Tj -277.92 -23.04 TD 0.0469 Tc -0.1469 Tw (Medical Books.) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -93.12 -23.04 TD ( ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0136 Tc -0.1136 Tw (Domitz, D. M.) Tj 58.08 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0364 Tc 0.1764 Tw ( & Schow, R. L. \(2000\). A new) Tj 128.64 0 TD 0.0525 Tc -0.1525 Tw ( CAPD ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (b) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.125 Tc (attery) Tj 22.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc (\226) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.0137 Tc 0.3663 Tw (Multiple ) Tj 36.96 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (uditory ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0167 Tc -0.1167 Tw (rocessing ) Tj -301.44 -23.04 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0194 Tc -0.1194 Tw (ssessment: Factor ) Tj 75.84 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.002 Tc -0.102 Tw (nalysis and ) Tj 47.04 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0032 Tc 0.0168 Tw (omparisons with SCAN. ) Tj 103.68 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0559 Tc -0.1559 Tw (American Journal of ) Tj -239.52 -22.56 TD 0.1008 Tc -0.2008 Tw (Audiology, 9,) Tj 54.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 101) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (111.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 123 0 obj 6945 endobj 121 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 122 0 R >> endobj 125 0 obj << /Length 126 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (35) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (35) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD -0.0691 Tc -0.0309 Tw (Emerson, M. F) Tj 59.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0111 Tc -0.0264 Tw (, Crandall, K. K., Seikel, J. A., & Chermak, G. D. \(1997\). Observations on use ) Tj -32.64 -22.56 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw (of the SCAN admini) Tj 82.08 0 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.0173 Tw (stered in a school setting to identify central auditory processing ) Tj -82.08 -23.04 TD -0.0015 Tc -0.0985 Tw (disorders in children. ) Tj 89.28 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0787 Tc 0.0613 Tw (Language, Speech ) Tj 76.32 0 TD -0.04 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.0321 Tc -0.1321 Tw ( Hearing Services in Schools, 28,) Tj 132.96 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 43) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0067 Tc (49.) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -372 -23.04 TD 0.006 Tc -0.074 Tw (Estes, R. I., Jerger, J., & Jacobson, G. \(2002\). Reversal of hemispheric asymmetry on auditory ) Tj 29.76 -23.04 TD 0.0086 Tc -0.1086 Tw (tasks in ) Tj 32.64 0 TD 0.0141 Tc -0.1141 Tw (children who are poor listeners) Tj 123.84 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0347 Tc -0.1347 Tw (. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, ) Tj -156.48 -23.04 TD 0.1533 Tc -0.2533 Tw (13, ) Tj 15.36 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (59) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.3133 Tc (71.) Tj 12.96 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -71.04 -23.04 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (Etymotic Research) Tj 75.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw ( \(2001\). ) Tj 36.96 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.1029 Tc -0.6829 Tw (QuickSIN Speech) Tj 70.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.19 Tc (in) Tj 8.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0433 Tc -0.1433 Tw (Noise Test) Tj 42.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0105 Tc -0.0895 Tw (Elk Grove Village, IL.) Tj 89.76 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (:) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0962 Tc -0.1962 Tw (Etymotic ) Tj -313.44 -23.04 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (Research.) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -68.64 -23.04 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.1075 Tw (Etymotic Research) Tj 75.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw ( \(2005\). ) Tj 36.96 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.1033 Tc 0 Tw (BBK) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.04 Tc -0.62 Tw (SIN Speech) Tj 46.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.29 Tc (in) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.15 Tc -0.25 Tw (Noise Test) Tj 42.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (Elk ) Tj 16.32 0 TD -0.1044 Tc 0.2444 Tw (Grove Village, IL.) Tj 72.96 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (:) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0362 Tc -0.1362 Tw (Etymotic ) Tj -312 -22.56 TD -0.03 Tc 0 Tw (Research.) Tj 38.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -68.64 -23.52 TD -0.0087 Tc 0.0287 Tw (Fisher, L. \(1976\). Fisher's auditory problems checklist. Bemidji, MN) Tj 275.04 0 TD -0.0214 Tc 0.1614 Tw (: Life Products.) Tj 61.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -336.96 -22.56 TD -0.0057 Tc -0.0204 Tw (Green, D. M. \(1973\). Temporal acuity as a function of frequency. ) Tj 269.28 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0425 Tc -0.1425 Tw (Journal of the Acoustic ) Tj -239.52 -23.52 TD -0 Tc -0.1 Tw (Society of America, 54) Tj 90.72 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.055 Tc -0.045 Tw (, 373) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc (379.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -161.28 -22.56 TD 0.0414 Tc -0.1414 Tw (Hall, J.) Tj 28.32 0 TD 0.0581 Tc -0.1581 Tw ( W. & Keske, C. \(1994) Tj 92.64 0 TD -0.1267 Tc 0.0267 Tw (, March) Tj 30.24 0 TD 0.0179 Tc -0.0493 Tw (\). Clinical experience with central auditory processin) Tj 214.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (g) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -341.28 -23.04 TD -0.0016 Tc -0.0245 Tw (disorders \(CAPD\). Presented at the Annual Convention of the American Academy of ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD 0.0467 Tc 0 Tw (Audiology) Tj 42.24 0 TD 0.1075 Tc -0.2075 Tw (, Richmond, VA) Tj 66.72 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -141.12 -23.04 TD 0.0061 Tc -0.0188 Tw (Hendler, T., Squires, N. K., & Emmerich, D. S. \(1990\). Psychophy) Tj 269.76 0 TD 0.0273 Tc -0.1273 Tw (sical measures of central ) Tj -240 -23.04 TD 0.0121 Tc -0.1121 Tw (auditory dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: ) Tj 173.76 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (N) Tj 7.2 0 TD 0.0106 Tc 0.0494 Tw (europhysiological and neuroanatomical ) Tj -180.96 -23.04 TD -0.0082 Tc -0.0918 Tw (correlates. ) Tj 46.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0306 Tc -0.1306 Tw (Ear and Hearing, 11) Tj 84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw (\(6\), 403) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.185 Tc (416.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -212.16 -23.04 TD -0.0079 Tc 0.0679 Tw (Humes, L. E. \(2005\). Do ) Tj 104.16 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\223) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0122 Tc -0.1122 Tw (auditory processing) Tj 78.72 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (\224) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0137 Tc -0.0604 Tw ( tests measure auditory processing in the elderly? ) Tj -161.76 -23.04 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.205 Tc 0 Tw (Ea) Tj 11.52 0 TD -0.0317 Tc -0.0683 Tw (r & Hearing, 26) Tj 64.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw (\(2\), 109) Tj 32.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.055 Tc (119.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 126 0 obj 5670 endobj 124 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 125 0 R >> endobj 128 0 obj << /Length 129 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (36) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (36) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD -0.0103 Tc 0.0383 Tw (Humes, L., Amos, N., & Wynne, M. \(1998\). Issues in the assessment of central auditory ) Tj 29.76 -22.56 TD -0.0206 Tc 0.0806 Tw (processing disorders. In F. Bess \(Ed.\) ) Tj 152.16 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0521 Tc -0.3121 Tw (Children with hearing impairment) Tj 138.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0843 Tc -0.0157 Tw ( \(pp. 127) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (136. ) Tj -329.28 -23.04 TD -0.0486 Tc 0 Tw (Memphis) Tj 37.44 0 TD 0.1 Tc (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.3167 Tc 0.6967 Tw (, TN) Tj 18.24 0 TD 0.0262 Tc -0.0062 Tw (: Bill Wilkerson Center Press.) Tj 120 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -208.32 -23.04 TD -0.0622 Tc -0.0378 Tw (Hurley, R.) Tj 41.28 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0128 Tc -0.1128 Tw (& Musiek, F. \(1997\). Effectiveness of three central auditory processing tests in ) Tj -16.8 -23.04 TD 0.007 Tc -0.107 Tw (identifying cerebral lesions. ) Tj 116.16 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0082 Tc -0.0397 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 8) Tj 201.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( 257) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (262.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -387.84 -23.04 TD -0.0308 Tc 0.4108 Tw (Ingelfinger, ) Tj 48.96 0 TD -0.074 Tc 0.454 Tw (J. A., ) Tj 23.52 0 TD -0.003 Tc -0.097 Tw (Mosteller, ) Tj 43.2 0 TD -0.0456 Tc 0.4256 Tw (F., Thibodeau, L. A., ) Tj 86.88 0 TD -0.0417 Tc 0.1817 Tw (& Ware, ) Tj 36.96 0 TD 0.048 Tc -0.148 Tw (J. H. \() Tj 24.48 0 TD 0.095 Tc 0 Tw (1987\).) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 4.8 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (Biostatis) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.0221 Tc -0.0779 Tw (tics in clinical ) Tj -300.96 -23.04 TD 0.1075 Tc 0 Tw (medicine) Tj 36.48 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.085 Tc -0.015 Tw ( \(2) Tj 10.56 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (nd) Tj 9.6 0 TD 0.0225 Tc -0.1225 Tw ( ed.\)) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.0014 Tc 0.0214 Tw (. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.) Tj 182.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -287.04 -23.04 TD -0.0676 Tc 0.1276 Tw (Jerger, S. Johnson, ) Tj 77.28 0 TD -0.0733 Tc -0.0267 Tw (K., ) Tj 14.88 0 TD -0.074 Tc 0.214 Tw (& Loiselle, ) Tj 47.52 0 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (L. ) Tj 11.04 0 TD 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (\(1988\). ) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.0103 Tc 0.1023 Tw (Pediatric central auditory dysfunction. ) Tj -155.04 -23.04 TD 0 Tc -0.0568 Tw (Comparison of children with confirmed lesions versus suspected processing disorders. ) Tj 0 -22.56 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.13 Tc 0 Tw (A) Tj 5.76 0 TD 0.0376 Tc -0.1376 Tw (merican Journal of Otology, 9) Tj 122.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.051 Tc -0.049 Tw (\(suppl\), 63) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1533 Tc (71.) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -216.48 -23.52 TD 0.0311 Tc -0.1311 Tw (Jerger, J.) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0144 Tc -0.1144 Tw ( & Musiek, F. \(2000\). Report of the Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis of ) Tj -8.16 -22.56 TD 0.0194 Tc -0.1194 Tw (Auditory Processing Disorders in School) Tj 164.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0067 Tc -0.1067 Tw (Age Children. ) Tj 61.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0605 Tc -0.0405 Tw (Journal of the American ) Tj -228.48 -23.52 TD 0.04 Tc -0.14 Tw (Academy of Audiology, 11) Tj 106.08 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(9\), 467) Tj 34.08 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (474.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -190.56 -22.56 TD -0.085 Tc 0 Tw (Jerg) Tj 16.32 0 TD -0.0063 Tc 0.013 Tw (er J, Thibodeau L, Martin J, Mehta J, Tillman G, Greenwald R, Britt L, Scott J, Overson G. ) Tj 13.44 -23.04 TD 0.0117 Tc -0.1117 Tw (\(2002\). Behavioral and electrophysiologic evidence of auditory processing disorder: ) Tj 342.24 0 TD -0.02 Tc 0 Tw (A) Tj 6.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -348.96 -23.04 TD -0.019 Tc 0.239 Tw (twin study. ) Tj 49.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0266 Tc -0.058 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 13) Tj 206.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (\(8\), 438) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.1533 Tc (60.) Tj 12.48 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -332.64 -23.04 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.04 Tc 0 Tw (Katz) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.0197 Tc -0.0827 Tw (, J. \(1962\). The use of staggered spondaic words for assessing the integr) Tj 290.4 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0243 Tc -0.1957 Tw (ty of the central ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD -0.0105 Tc -0.0895 Tw (auditory nervous system. ) Tj 102.24 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0519 Tc -0.1519 Tw (Journal of Auditory Research, 2) Tj 129.6 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (, 327) Tj 19.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\226) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0.12 Tc 0.26 Tw (337 ) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -304.32 -23.04 TD 0.0218 Tc -0.1218 Tw (Keith, R. W. \(1986\). ) Tj 87.36 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0317 Tc -0.1317 Tw (SCAN: A) Tj 38.4 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( S) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.0255 Tc -0.1255 Tw (creening Test for Auditory Processing Disorders) Tj 195.84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0617 Tc 0.0577 Tw (. San Antonio: ) Tj -299.52 -23.04 TD -0.0032 Tc -0.0968 Tw (The Psychological Corporation.) Tj 127.2 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -156.96 -23.04 TD 0.0021 Tc -0.0488 Tw (Keith, R. W. \(1995\). Development and standardization of SCAN) Tj 261.6 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.0312 Tw (A: A test of auditory ) Tj -235.2 -22.56 TD -0.009 Tc -0.0224 Tw (processing disorders in adolescents and adults. ) Tj 191.04 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.049 Tc -0.149 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of ) Tj -191.04 -23.52 TD 0.0318 Tc -0.1318 Tw (Audiology, 6) Tj 51.84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (\(4\), 286) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (292.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 129 0 obj 6263 endobj 127 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 112 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 128 0 R >> endobj 132 0 obj << /Length 133 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (37) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (37) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD 0.0292 Tc -0.1292 Tw (Keith, R. \(1998\). Comments on) Tj 128.64 0 TD 0.0079 Tc -0.0709 Tw ( \223The Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for CAPD\224 by ) Tj -98.88 -22.56 TD 0.0226 Tc -0.1226 Tw (Emerson et al. \(1997\). ) Tj 94.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0322 Tc -0.2007 Tw (Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 29) Tj 224.16 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0171 Tc 0.1229 Tw (\(2\), 117 ) Tj 34.08 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\226) Tj 5.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -357.6 -23.04 TD 0.185 Tc -0.285 Tw (118. ) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -50.4 -23.04 TD -0.124 Tc 0 Tw (Keith) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.078 Tc -0.178 Tw (, R. W. ) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.23 Tc 0 Tw (\(2000) Tj 24 0 TD -0.12 Tc (a) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.03 Tc (\)) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0 Tc -0.02 Tw ( Development and standardization of the SCAN) Tj 191.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0431 Tc -0.1431 Tw (C test for auditory ) Tj -251.52 -23.04 TD 0.0073 Tc 0.3727 Tw (processing disor) Tj 65.28 0 TD -0.0127 Tc 0.1527 Tw (ders in children. ) Tj 69.6 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0418 Tc -0.1418 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology) Tj 191.04 0 TD -0.1667 Tc 0.0667 Tw (, 11) Tj 14.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.06 Tc -0.04 Tw (\(8\), ) Tj -340.8 -23.04 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (438) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.185 Tc (445.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -65.76 -23.04 TD 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (Keith, R. W. \(2000b) Tj 81.6 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.56 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.1125 Tc 0 Tw (SCAN) Tj 24.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0209 Tc -0.1209 Tw (C: Test for Auditory Processing Disorders in Children) Tj 221.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw (Revised. ) Tj -314.88 -23.04 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.122 Tc 0.502 Tw (San Antonio) Tj 49.92 0 TD 0.0033 Tc 0.3767 Tw (, TX) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.0077 Tc -0.1077 Tw (: Psychological Corporation.) Tj 117.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -215.52 -23.04 TD -0.124 Tc 0 Tw (Keith) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.0825 Tc -0.1825 Tw (, R. W. \(2001\). ) Tj 65.76 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0131 Tc -0.1131 Tw (Random Gap Dete) Tj 74.4 0 TD 0.0775 Tc -0.3375 Tw (ction Test Manual. ) Tj 78.24 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1225 Tc 0.2625 Tw ( St. Louis) Tj 38.4 0 TD -0.1233 Tc 0.0233 Tw (, MO) Tj 20.64 0 TD 0.0022 Tc 0.1378 Tw (: Auditec.) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -340.8 -22.56 TD -0.0671 Tc -0.0329 Tw (King, C.) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0009 Tc 0.1409 Tw ( Warrrier, C.) Tj 51.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0374 Tc -0.1374 Tw (M., Hayes, E., & Kraus. ) Tj 99.36 0 TD -0.0103 Tc 0.0703 Tw (N. \(2002\). Deficits in auditory brainstem ) Tj -159.36 -23.52 TD 0.0106 Tc -0.1106 Tw (encoding of speech sounds in children with learning problems. ) Tj 252.96 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0365 Tc -0.1365 Tw (Neuroscience Letters, ) Tj -252.96 -22.56 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (319) Tj 15.84 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.175 Tc 0.075 Tw (, 111) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (115.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -85.92 -23.52 TD 0.023 Tc -0.123 Tw (Maxwell, D.) Tj 49.92 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.09 Tc 0.31 Tw ( & Satake, E) Tj 50.88 0 TD 0.0025 Tc -0.1025 Tw (. \(2006\). ) Tj 38.88 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0246 Tc -0.1246 Tw (Research and statistical methods in communication sciences ) Tj -112.32 -22.56 TD 0.0677 Tc -0.3277 Tw (and disorders. ) Tj 62.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0223 Tc 0.0423 Tw (Clifton Park, NY: Thomson) Tj 113.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0033 Tc -0.1033 Tw (Delmar Learning.) Tj 71.04 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -280.8 -23.04 TD 0.0422 Tc 0 Tw (McCroskey) Tj 46.08 0 TD -0.024 Tc 0.164 Tw (, R. L.) Tj 25.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0486 Tc 0.1086 Tw ( & Keith, ) Tj 39.84 0 TD 0.008 Tc 0.372 Tw (R. W. \() Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.23 Tc 0 Tw (1996\)) Tj 24 0 TD -0.1 Tc (. ) Tj 7.2 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0661 Tc -0.1661 Tw (Auditory Fusion Test) Tj 84.48 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (\226) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.01 Tc -0.11 Tw (Revised \(AFT) Tj 54.72 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.56 Tc (R\)) Tj 9.6 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0667 Tc 0.2867 Tw (. St. Louis) Tj 43.68 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj -345.12 -23.04 TD -0.135 Tc (MO) Tj 15.84 0 TD -0.0511 Tc 0.1911 Tw (: Auditec.) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -87.36 -23.04 TD -0.1311 Tc 0 Tw (Moncrieff) Tj 40.32 0 TD -0.038 Tc -0.062 Tw (, D. E.) Tj 25.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0.24 Tw ( & ) Tj 12.96 0 TD -0.04 Tc 0.42 Tw ( Musiek) Tj 32.64 0 TD 0.006 Tc -0.106 Tw (, F. E.) Tj 24 0 TD 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw ( \(2002\). ) Tj 37.44 0 TD -0.0058 Tc -0.0942 Tw (Interaural asymmetries revealed by dichotic listening ) Tj -145.44 -23.04 TD -0.0039 Tc -0.0275 Tw (tests in normal and dyslexic children. ) Tj 154.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0259 Tc -0.1259 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, ) Tj -154.08 -23.04 TD 0.3133 Tc 0 Tw (13,) Tj 12.96 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( 428) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (437.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -81.12 -23.04 TD -0.04 Tc 0 Tw (Musiek) Tj 29.76 0 TD 0.006 Tc -0.106 Tw (, F. E.) Tj 24 0 TD 0.0857 Tc -0.1857 Tw ( \(1983\). ) Tj 36.96 0 TD -0.0322 Tc 0.138 Tw (Assessment of central auditory dysfunction: The dichoti) Tj 226.56 0 TD 0.029 Tc -0.129 Tw (c digit test ) Tj -287.52 -23.04 TD 0.002 Tc -0.102 Tw (revisited. ) Tj 41.76 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw (Ear ) Tj 17.76 0 TD -0.04 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.0033 Tc -0.0967 Tw ( Hearing, 4) Tj 46.08 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1067 Tc 0.0067 Tw (\(2\), 79) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.3133 Tc (83.) Tj 12.96 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -192.96 -22.56 TD 0.0043 Tc -0.0479 Tw (Musiek, F.E., Baran, J.A. & Pinheiro, M.L. P300 results in patients with lesions of the auditory ) Tj 29.76 -23.52 TD -0.0374 Tc 0.2254 Tw (areas of the cerebrum. ) Tj 93.6 0 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.0675 Tc 0.2715 Tw (J Am Acad Audiol. 1992 Jan;3\(1\):5) Tj 120 0 TD 0.0828 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.02 Tc (15.) Tj 10.56 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 133 0 obj 6664 endobj 130 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 131 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 132 0 R >> endobj 135 0 obj << /Length 136 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (38) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (38) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD 0.0267 Tc -0.1267 Tw (Musiek, F.) Tj 42.72 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0088 Tc 0.1968 Tw (E., Charette, L., Kelly, T., L) Tj 113.28 0 TD 0.0079 Tc 0.0121 Tw (ee, W., & Musiek, E. \(1999\). Hit and false) Tj 169.92 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0115 Tc 0.1515 Tw (positive rates ) Tj -301.44 -22.56 TD 0.0027 Tc -0.0227 Tw (for ther middle latency response in patients with central nervous system involvement. ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0032 Tc -0.0346 Tw (Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10) Tj 205.92 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (, 124) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc (132.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -276.48 -23.04 TD -0.0191 Tc -0.0809 Tw (Musiek, F. E.) Tj 53.76 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0226 Tc -0.0626 Tw ( & Chermak, G. D. \(1994\). Three common) Tj 173.76 0 TD 0.0066 Tc -0.0266 Tw (ly asked questions bout central audtiory ) Tj -200.16 -23.04 TD -0.0287 Tc 0.1207 Tw (processing disorders: Assessment. ) Tj 144.48 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.02 Tc -0.12 Tw (American Journal of Audiology,) Tj 129.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (3) Tj 5.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0467 Tc (\(3\)) Tj 11.52 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.1 Tc (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.28 Tc (23) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.1533 Tc (26.) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -353.28 -23.04 TD 0.031 Tc -0.131 Tw (Musiek, F. E., & Chermak, G. D. \(200) Tj 153.6 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (7) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.0138 Tc -0.0862 Tw (\). Auditory neuroscience and \(central\) auditory ) Tj -129.12 -23.04 TD -0.0071 Tc 0.0991 Tw (processing disorder: An overview. In F.) Tj 158.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0337 Tc -0.1337 Tw (E. Musiek ) Tj 44.16 0 TD -0.2333 Tc 0.1333 Tw (& G.) Tj 19.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0147 Tc -0.1147 Tw (D. Chermak \(Vol. Eds.\)) Tj 95.52 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -325.44 -23.04 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0278 Tc -0.1278 Tw (Handbook of \(central) Tj 86.4 0 TD 0.0158 Tc -0.1158 Tw (\) auditory processing disorder: Vol. 1) Tj 152.16 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0017 Tc 0.0617 Tw (Auditory neuroscience and ) Tj -240.96 -23.04 TD 0.06 Tc -0.16 Tw (diagnosis ) Tj 41.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.098 Tc -0.002 Tw (\(pp. X) Tj 24.96 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.004 Tc 0.064 Tw (XX\). San Diego: Plural.) Tj 96.48 0 TD -0.0235 Tc 0.0675 Tw ( \(AUTHOR: This is volume I? If that is what ) Tj -166.08 -22.56 TD 0.0075 Tc -0.0595 Tw (you meet, cross reference to chapter in this volume in the) Tj 228.96 0 TD -0.0474 Tc 0.2902 Tw ( text and delete here. If you ) Tj -228.96 -23.52 TD -0.0109 Tc 0.0309 Tw (mean Vol. 2 chapter, please change here to reflect.\)) Tj 205.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD ( ) Tj -237.6 -22.56 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0226 Tc 0.0426 Tw (Musiek, F. E., Gollegly, K. M., Lamb, L. E.) Tj 175.2 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.0028 Tc -0.0099 Tw ( & Lamb, P. \(1990\). Selected issues in screening for ) Tj -147.84 -23.52 TD -0.0105 Tc 0.0065 Tw (central auditory processing dysfunction. ) Tj 165.12 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0665 Tc -0.1665 Tw (Seminars in Hearing, 11) Tj 99.36 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (, 372) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.12 Tc (384) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -335.04 -22.56 TD -0.0045 Tc -0.0041 Tw (Musiek, F. E., Shinn, J. B., Jirsa, R., Bamiou, D. E. Baran, J. A. & Zaidan, E. \(2005\). GIN ) Tj 29.76 -23.04 TD -0.072 Tc 0 Tw (\(Gaps) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.84 0 TD -0.565 Tc (In) Tj 7.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0367 Tc -0.1367 Tw (Noise\) ) Tj 29.28 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (t) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0233 Tc -0.0767 Tw (est ) Tj 13.92 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (p) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.0025 Tc -0.0975 Tw (erformance in ) Tj 58.08 0 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.0409 Tc -0.1409 Tw (ubjects with ) Tj 51.36 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0375 Tc -0.1375 Tw (onfirmed ) Tj 39.36 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (c) Tj 4.32 0 TD -0.035 Tc -0.065 Tw (entral ) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (uditory ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (n) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.1167 Tc -0.2167 Tw (ervous ) Tj -316.32 -23.04 TD -0.05 Tc 0 Tw (s) Tj 3.84 0 TD 0.022 Tc 0.358 Tw (ystem ) Tj 26.4 0 TD 0.1 Tc 0 Tw (i) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0182 Tc -0.1182 Tw (nvolvement. ) Tj 54.72 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw (Ear ) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (and) Tj 15.84 0 TD 0.025 Tc -0.125 Tw ( Hearing, 26) Tj 50.88 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(6\), 608) Tj 31.2 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.12 Tc (618) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -251.52 -23.04 TD -0.061 Tc 0 Tw (Neijenhuis) Tj 43.2 0 TD 0.0212 Tc -0.1212 Tw (, K. A. M., ) Tj 45.6 0 TD -0.0037 Tc 0.0066 Tw (Snik, A., Priester, G., van Kordenoordt, S., van den Broek, P. \(2000\). Age ) Tj -59.04 -23.04 TD -0 Tc -0.0314 Tw (effects and normative data on a Dutch test battery for auditory processing disorders. ) Tj 0 -23.04 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0047 Tc -0.1047 Tw (International Journal of Audiology, 41) Tj 155.52 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.055 Tc -0.045 Tw (, 334) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc (346.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -226.08 -23.04 TD 0.0253 Tc 0.1147 Tw (Oelschlaeger M. L) Tj 74.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.,) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0305 Tc -0.1305 Tw ( & Orchik D. \(1977\). Tim) Tj 106.08 0 TD -0.12 Tc 0 Tw (e) Tj 4.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0085 Tc -0.1085 Tw (compressed speech discrimination in central ) Tj -163.2 -23.04 TD 0.0149 Tc -0.1149 Tw (auditory disorder: a pediatric case study. ) Tj 167.04 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0514 Tc -0.3114 Tw (Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, ) Tj -167.04 -22.56 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (42) Tj 10.56 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(4\), 483) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.04 Tc (486) Tj 15.36 0 TD -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 136 0 obj 6574 endobj 134 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 131 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 135 0 R >> endobj 138 0 obj << /Length 139 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (39) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (39) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD 0.0009 Tc -0.0409 Tw (Pinheiro, M. \(1977\). Tests of central auditory function in children with learning disabilities. In ) Tj 29.76 -22.56 TD -0.025 Tc -0.075 Tw (R. ) Tj 11.52 0 TD 0.068 Tc 0 Tw (Keith) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.17 Tc -0.27 Tw ( \(Ed.\)) Tj 23.04 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0914 Tc -0.1914 Tw (Central ) Tj 33.6 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (a) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0.0557 Tc -0.1557 Tw (uditory ) Tj 31.68 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (d) Tj 5.28 0 TD -0.079 Tc (ysfunction) Tj 40.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0843 Tc -0.0157 Tw ( \(pp. 223) Tj 35.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.0975 Tc (256\)) Tj 18.72 0 TD 0.0187 Tc -0.0501 Tw (. New York: Grune & ) Tj -237.6 -23.04 TD 0.0625 Tc -0.1625 Tw (Stratton, 223) Tj 51.84 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (256.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -102.72 -23.04 TD -0.0145 Tc 0.0622 Tw (Purdy, S., Kelly, A., & Davies, M. \(2002\). Auditory brainstem response, middle latency ) Tj 29.76 -23.04 TD 0.0021 Tc -0.0541 Tw (response, and late cortical evoked potentials in children with learning disab) Tj 300.96 0 TD -0.0214 Tc 0 Tw (ilities) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0.38 Tc (. ) Tj 5.28 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0814 Tc -0.1814 Tw (Journal ) Tj -328.32 -23.04 TD 0.0012 Tc -0.0212 Tw (of the American Academy of Audiology, 13) Tj 172.32 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.12 Tc -0.22 Tw ( 367) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.065 Tc (382.) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -242.88 -23.04 TD 0.0133 Tc -0.088 Tw (Rappaport, J. M., Gilliver, J. M., Phillips, D. P. Van Dorpe, R. A., Maxner, C. E., & Bhan, V. ) Tj 29.76 -23.04 TD 0.0181 Tc -0.1181 Tw (\(1994\). Auditory temporal resolution in multiple sclerosis. ) Tj 241.44 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0367 Tc -0.1367 Tw (Journal of Otolaryngology, ) Tj -241.44 -23.04 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (23) Tj 10.56 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.565 Tc (\(5) Tj 8.16 0 TD -0.038 Tc -0.062 Tw (\), 307) Tj 23.52 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (324.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -92.64 -22.56 TD 0.0115 Tc -0.1115 Tw (Schochat E. & Musiek, F.E. Maturation of outcomes of behavioral and electrophysiologic tests ) Tj 29.76 -23.52 TD -0.0023 Tc -0.0977 Tw (of central auditory function. ) Tj 116.64 0 TD /F0 8.4 Tf -0.0525 Tc 0.2325 Tw (J Commun Disord. 2006 Jan) Tj 96 0 TD 0.0828 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0154 Tc (Feb;39\(1\):78) Tj 43.68 0 TD 0.0828 Tc (-) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.02 Tc -0.2 Tw (92. ) Tj 12.96 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -304.32 -22.56 TD -0.142 Tc 0.282 Tw (Schow, R. L.) Tj 52.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0061 Tc -0.0624 Tw ( & Chermak, G. D. \(1999\). Implications from factor analysis f) Tj 251.04 0 TD -0.0135 Tc -0.0865 Tw (or central auditory ) Tj -276 -23.52 TD -0.0405 Tc 0.4205 Tw (processing disorders. ) Tj 89.76 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0121 Tc -0.1121 Tw (American Journal of Audiology, 8) Tj 136.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0171 Tc -0.1171 Tw (\(2\), 137) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (142.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -308.64 -22.56 TD -0.018 Tc 0.038 Tw (Schow, R. L., Seikel, J. A., Chermak, G. D.) Tj 174.24 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0112 Tc -0.0046 Tw ( & Berent, M. \(2000\). Central auditory processes ) Tj -146.88 -23.04 TD -0.0094 Tc -0.0306 Tw (and test measures: ASHA 1996 revisited. ) Tj 172.32 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0378 Tc -0.2578 Tw (American Journal of Audiology, ) Tj 131.52 0 TD -0.2 Tc 0 Tw (9) Tj 5.28 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.1533 Tc -0.2533 Tw (, 63) Tj 15.36 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.1667 Tc (68.) Tj 12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -369.6 -23.04 TD -0.04 Tc 0.42 Tw (Shiffman, ) Tj 41.76 0 TD 0.098 Tc -0.198 Tw (J. M. \() Tj 25.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (1999) Tj 21.12 0 TD -0.275 Tc 0.175 Tw (\). ) Tj 10.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0335 Tc -0.1335 Tw (Accuracy of CAPD screening: A longitudinal study. ) Tj 213.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.018 Tc -0.082 Tw ( Master\222s thesis, ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD -0.0029 Tc 0.1429 Tw (糖心传媒, Pocatello, ID.) Tj 150.24 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -180 -23.04 TD -0.0688 Tc -0.0312 Tw (Simpson, ) Tj 39.36 0 TD 0.0736 Tc -0.1736 Tw (J. G. \(1981\). ) Tj 56.16 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.015 Tc -0.115 Tw (A comparison of two behavioral screening scales for children with ) Tj -65.76 -23.04 TD 0.0186 Tc -0.3586 Tw (auditory processing dis) Tj 94.08 0 TD 0.0271 Tc -0.1271 Tw (orders. ) Tj 31.2 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0076 Tc -0.0239 Tw ( Master\222s thesis, 糖心传媒, Pocatello, ID.) Tj 217.44 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -372.48 -23.04 TD -0.0856 Tc -0.0144 Tw (Smoski, W.) Tj 46.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0036 Tc -0.1036 Tw (J., Brunt, M.) Tj 50.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0313 Tc 0.0913 Tw (A., & Tannahill, J.) Tj 74.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0164 Tc -0.1164 Tw (C. \(1992\). Listening characteristics of children with ) Tj -149.28 -23.04 TD -0.0111 Tc 0.0311 Tw (central auditory processing disorders. ) Tj 152.16 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0431 Tc -0.2231 Tw (Language, Speech and Hearing Services in ) Tj -152.16 -22.56 TD 0.007 Tc -0.107 Tw (Schools, 23) Tj 46.56 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD -0.04 Tc -0.06 Tw ( 145) Tj 17.28 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.185 Tc (152.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 139 0 obj 5935 endobj 137 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 131 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 138 0 R >> endobj 141 0 obj << /Length 142 0 R >> stream BT 77.76 750.24 TD 0 0 0 rg /F0 10 Tf 0.0012 Tc 0.0588 Tw (Musiek and Chermak ) Tj 88.32 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0038 Tc -0.0962 Tw ( Volume 1, Chapter 6) Tj 86.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 1.44 0 TD ( ) Tj 169.44 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (40) Tj 10.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -360 -11.52 TD ( ) Tj 0 -576.96 TD ( ) Tj 349.92 0 TD 0.28 Tc 0 Tw (40) Tj -379.68 558.24 TD -0.1858 Tc 0.5658 Tw (Spaulding, T.) Tj 53.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0242 Tc -0.0282 Tw (J., Plante, E., & Farinella, K.) Tj 115.68 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0249 Tc 0.0849 Tw (A. \(2006\). Eligibility criteria for language ) Tj -144.96 -22.56 TD -0.0081 Tc -0.0319 Tw (impairment: Is the low end of normal always appropriate) Tj 227.04 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.086 Tc -0.066 Tw (? Language, Speech, and ) Tj -227.04 -23.04 TD 0.0664 Tc -0.2864 Tw (Hearing Services in Schools, 37,) Tj 131.04 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.2 Tc 0.1 Tw ( 61) Tj 12.48 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD -0.0067 Tc -0.0933 Tw (72. ) Tj 14.88 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -191.52 -23.04 TD -0.0486 Tc 0 Tw (Summers) Tj 37.44 0 TD -0 Tc -0.004 Tw (, S. A. \(2003\). ) Tj 61.92 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.042 Tc -0.142 Tw (Factor stru) Tj 46.08 0 TD 0.0096 Tc -0.1096 Tw (cture, correlations, and mean data on Form A of the Beta III ) Tj -115.68 -23.04 TD 0.0169 Tc -0.1169 Tw (version of Multiple Auditory Processing Assessment \(MAPA\). ) Tj 249.12 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0 Tc 0.02 Tw ( Master\222s thesis, 糖心传媒 ) Tj -249.12 -23.04 TD -0.0268 Tc -0.0732 Tw (State University, Pocatello, ID) Tj 122.4 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -154.56 -23.04 TD -0.0775 Tc -0.0225 Tw (Swets, J.) Tj 34.56 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0044 Tc -0.051 Tw (A. \(1988\). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems) Tj 232.8 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.07 Tc -0.17 Tw (. Science) Tj 38.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.065 Tc 0 Tw (240,) Tj 17.76 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.16 Tc -0.26 Tw ( 1285) Tj 23.04 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 3.36 0 TD 0.012 Tc (1293.) Tj 22.08 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -379.68 -23.04 TD 0.0068 Tc -0.1068 Tw (VanDyke, J. \(1985\). Evaluation of classroom listening behaviors. ) Tj 268.8 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0668 Tc -0.4068 Tw (Rocky Mountain Journal of ) Tj -239.04 -23.04 TD 0.0123 Tc -0.1123 Tw (Communication Disorders) Tj 107.04 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.2 Tc (1) Tj 4.8 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0025 Tc 0.1425 Tw (\(AUTHOR: please supply page numbers\)) Tj 165.6 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -316.8 -22.56 TD -0.0588 Tc -0.0412 Tw (Warrier, ) Tj 35.52 0 TD -0.025 Tc 0 Tw (C.) Tj 9.12 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0254 Tc -0.0746 Tw (M., Johnson, K.) Tj 63.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0155 Tc -0.0845 Tw (L., Hayes, E.) Tj 51.84 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD -0.0124 Tc 0.0496 Tw (A., Nicol, T., & Kraus, N. \(2004\). Learn) Tj 161.76 0 TD 0.0573 Tc 0.0827 Tw (ing impaired ) Tj -300.48 -23.52 TD -0.0095 Tc 0.0055 Tw (children exhibit timing deficits and training) Tj 174.24 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0127 Tc -0.1127 Tw (related improvements in auditory cortical ) Tj -177.12 -22.56 TD -0.0056 Tc 0.0016 Tw (responses to speech in noise. ) Tj 117.6 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0383 Tc -0.1383 Tw (Experimental Brain Research, 157) Tj 139.68 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.065 Tc -0.165 Tw (, 431) Tj 20.16 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (441.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -327.84 -23.52 TD -0.0021 Tc 0.0461 Tw (Willeford, J. \(1976\). Differential diagnosis of central auditory dysfunction. In L) Tj 319.2 0 TD 0.0047 Tc -0.1047 Tw (. Bradford \(Ed.\), ) Tj -289.44 -22.56 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0298 Tc -0.1298 Tw (Audiology: An audio journal for continuing education) Tj 217.44 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (, ) Tj 4.8 0 TD -0.2 Tc (2) Tj 4.8 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0321 Tc 0.0281 Tw (. New York: Grune & Stratton.) Tj 123.36 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -380.16 -23.04 TD -0.0533 Tc 0 Tw (Willeford) Tj 38.4 0 TD -0.17 Tc 0.31 Tw (, J. A.) Tj 24 0 TD 0.134 Tc -0.234 Tw ( \(1985) Tj 26.4 0 TD -0.0133 Tc 0.0442 Tw (\). Assessment of central auditory disorders in children. In ) Tj 236.64 0 TD -0.08 Tc 0.22 Tw (M. L. ) Tj 24.96 0 TD -0.0363 Tc -0.0637 Tw (Pinheiro ) Tj -320.64 -23.04 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (& ) Tj 10.08 0 TD 0.0325 Tc -0.1325 Tw (F. E. ) Tj 21.6 0 TD 0.0867 Tc -0.1867 Tw (Musiek \(Eds.\)) Tj 56.64 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (,) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj 2.88 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0404 Tc -0.0204 Tw (Assessment of central auditory ) Tj 126.24 0 TD 0.0262 Tc -0.1262 Tw (dysfunction: Foundations and ) Tj -219.84 -23.04 TD 0.0272 Tc -0.1272 Tw (clinical correlates) Tj 73.44 0 TD /F0 10 Tf 0.0529 Tc -0.1529 Tw ( \(pp. 239) Tj 36 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.2175 Tc (255\)) Tj 18.72 0 TD /F1 10 Tf -0.1 Tc (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0361 Tc 0.1418 Tw ( Los Angeles: Williams & Wilkins.) Tj 145.92 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -309.12 -23.04 TD -0.0278 Tc -0.0722 Tw (Woods, A. G) Tj 52.32 0 TD -0.1 Tc 0 Tw (.) Tj 2.4 0 TD 0.0292 Tc -0.0892 Tw (, Pe\361a, E. D., & Martin, F. N. \(2004\). Exploring possible socio) Tj 254.4 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.0141 Tc -0.1141 Tw (cultural bias on the ) Tj -282.24 -23.04 TD -0.074 Tc -0.026 Tw (SCAN. ) Tj 34.08 0 TD /F1 10 Tf 0.0379 Tc -0.1379 Tw (American Journal of Audiology, 13) Tj 142.08 0 TD /F0 10 Tf -0.0514 Tc -0.0486 Tw (\(2\), 173) Tj 31.68 0 TD 0.03 Tc 0 Tw (-) Tj 2.88 0 TD 0.185 Tc (184.) Tj 17.76 0 TD 0 Tc -0.1 Tw ( ) Tj -228.48 -34.56 TD ( ) Tj ET endstream endobj 142 0 obj 5878 endobj 140 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 131 0 R /Resources << /Font << /F0 6 0 R /F1 14 0 R >> /ProcSet 2 0 R >> /Contents 141 0 R >> endobj 6 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F0 /BaseFont /TimesNewRoman /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 250 333 408 500 500 833 778 180 333 333 500 564 250 333 250 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 564 564 564 444 921 722 667 667 722 611 556 722 722 333 389 722 611 889 722 722 556 722 667 556 611 722 722 944 722 722 611 333 278 333 469 500 333 444 500 444 500 444 333 500 500 278 278 500 278 778 500 500 500 500 333 389 278 500 500 722 500 500 444 480 200 480 541 778 500 778 333 500 444 1000 500 500 333 1000 556 333 889 778 611 778 778 333 333 444 444 350 500 1000 333 980 389 333 722 778 444 722 250 333 500 500 500 500 200 500 333 760 276 500 564 333 760 500 400 549 300 300 333 576 453 250 333 300 310 500 750 750 750 444 722 722 722 722 722 722 889 667 611 611 611 611 333 333 333 333 722 722 722 722 722 722 722 564 722 722 722 722 722 722 556 500 444 444 444 444 444 444 667 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 549 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /FontDescriptor 7 0 R >> endobj 7 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /TimesNewRoman /Flags 34 /FontBBox [ -250 -216 1171 1000 ] /MissingWidth 325 /StemV 73 /StemH 73 /ItalicAngle 0 /CapHeight 891 /XHeight 446 /Ascent 891 /Descent -216 /Leading 149 /MaxWidth 976 /AvgWidth 401 >> endobj 14 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F1 /BaseFont /TimesNewRoman,Italic /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 250 333 420 500 500 833 778 214 333 333 500 675 250 333 250 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 675 675 675 500 920 611 611 667 722 611 611 722 722 333 444 667 556 833 667 722 611 722 611 500 556 722 611 833 611 556 556 389 278 389 422 500 333 500 500 444 500 444 278 500 500 278 278 444 278 722 500 500 500 500 389 389 278 500 444 667 444 444 389 400 275 400 541 778 500 778 333 500 556 889 500 500 333 1000 500 333 944 778 556 778 778 333 333 556 556 350 500 889 333 980 389 333 667 778 389 556 250 389 500 500 500 500 275 500 333 760 276 500 675 333 760 500 400 549 300 300 333 576 523 250 333 300 310 500 750 750 750 500 611 611 611 611 611 611 889 667 611 611 611 611 333 333 333 333 722 667 722 722 722 722 722 675 722 722 722 722 722 556 611 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 667 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 549 500 500 500 500 500 444 500 444 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /FontDescriptor 15 0 R >> endobj 15 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /TimesNewRoman,Italic /Flags 98 /FontBBox [ -250 -216 1171 1000 ] /MissingWidth 380 /StemV 73 /StemH 73 /ItalicAngle -11 /CapHeight 891 /XHeight 446 /Ascent 891 /Descent -216 /Leading 149 /MaxWidth 976 /AvgWidth 402 >> endobj 18 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F2 /BaseFont /TimesNewRoman,Bold /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 250 333 555 500 500 1000 833 278 333 333 500 570 250 333 250 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 570 570 570 500 930 722 667 722 722 667 611 778 778 389 500 778 667 944 722 778 611 778 722 556 667 722 722 1000 722 722 667 333 278 333 581 500 333 500 556 444 556 444 333 500 556 278 333 556 278 833 556 500 556 556 444 389 333 556 500 722 500 500 444 394 220 394 520 778 500 778 333 500 500 1000 500 500 333 1000 556 333 1000 778 667 778 778 333 333 500 500 350 500 1000 333 1000 389 333 722 778 444 722 250 333 500 500 500 500 220 500 333 747 300 500 570 333 747 500 400 549 300 300 333 576 540 250 333 300 330 500 750 750 750 500 722 722 722 722 722 722 1000 722 667 667 667 667 389 389 389 389 722 722 778 778 778 778 778 570 778 722 722 722 722 722 611 556 500 500 500 500 500 500 722 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 278 500 556 500 500 500 500 500 549 500 556 556 556 556 500 556 500 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /FontDescriptor 19 0 R >> endobj 19 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /TimesNewRoman,Bold /Flags 16418 /FontBBox [ -250 -216 1171 1000 ] /MissingWidth 325 /StemV 136 /StemH 136 /ItalicAngle 0 /CapHeight 891 /XHeight 446 /Ascent 891 /Descent -216 /Leading 149 /MaxWidth 976 /AvgWidth 427 >> endobj 33 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F3 /BaseFont /Tahoma,Bold /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 293 343 489 818 637 1199 781 275 454 454 637 818 313 431 313 577 637 637 637 637 637 637 637 637 637 637 363 363 818 818 818 566 920 685 686 667 757 615 581 745 764 483 500 696 572 893 771 770 657 770 726 633 612 739 675 1028 685 670 623 454 577 454 818 637 546 599 632 527 629 594 382 629 640 302 363 603 302 954 640 617 629 629 434 515 416 640 579 890 604 576 526 623 637 623 818 1000 637 1000 275 637 489 1000 637 637 546 1676 633 425 1037 1000 623 1000 1000 275 275 489 489 637 637 909 546 861 515 425 985 1000 526 670 293 343 637 637 637 637 637 637 546 929 508 703 818 431 929 637 520 818 539 539 546 651 637 363 546 539 539 703 1128 1128 1128 566 685 685 685 685 685 685 989 667 615 615 615 615 483 483 483 483 774 771 770 770 770 770 770 818 770 739 739 739 739 670 659 646 599 599 599 599 599 599 937 527 594 594 594 594 302 302 302 302 620 640 617 617 617 617 617 818 617 640 640 640 640 576 629 576 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /FontDescriptor 34 0 R >> endobj 34 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /Tahoma,Bold /Flags 16416 /FontBBox [ -250 -207 2006 1000 ] /MissingWidth 453 /StemV 162 /StemH 162 /ItalicAngle 0 /CapHeight 1000 /XHeight 500 /Ascent 1000 /Descent -207 /Leading 207 /MaxWidth 1672 /AvgWidth 506 >> endobj 60 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F4 /BaseFont /Symbol /FirstChar 30 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 600 600 250 333 713 500 549 833 778 439 333 333 500 549 250 549 250 278 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 549 549 549 444 549 722 667 722 612 611 763 603 722 333 631 722 686 889 722 722 768 741 556 592 611 690 439 768 645 795 611 333 863 333 658 500 500 631 549 549 494 439 521 411 603 329 603 549 549 576 521 549 549 521 549 603 439 576 713 686 493 686 494 480 200 480 549 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 620 247 549 167 713 500 753 753 753 753 1042 987 603 987 603 400 549 411 549 549 713 494 460 549 549 549 549 1000 603 1000 658 823 686 795 987 768 768 823 768 768 713 713 713 713 713 713 713 768 713 790 790 890 823 549 250 713 603 603 1042 987 603 987 603 494 329 790 790 786 713 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 494 600 329 274 686 686 686 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 600 ] /FontDescriptor 61 0 R >> endobj 61 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /Symbol /Flags 6 /FontBBox [ -250 -220 1247 1005 ] /MissingWidth 332 /StemV 109 /StemH 109 /ItalicAngle 0 /CapHeight 1005 /XHeight 503 /Ascent 1005 /Descent -220 /Leading 225 /MaxWidth 1039 /AvgWidth 600 >> endobj 62 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /Name /F5 /BaseFont /Arial /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 255 /Widths [ 278 278 355 556 556 889 667 191 333 333 389 584 278 333 278 278 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 278 278 584 584 584 556 1015 667 667 722 722 667 611 778 722 278 500 667 556 833 722 778 667 778 722 667 611 722 667 944 667 667 611 278 278 278 469 556 333 556 556 500 556 556 278 556 556 222 222 500 222 833 556 556 556 556 333 500 278 556 500 722 500 500 500 334 260 334 584 750 556 750 222 556 333 1000 556 556 333 1000 667 333 1000 750 611 750 750 222 222 333 333 350 556 1000 333 1000 500 333 944 750 500 667 278 333 556 556 556 556 260 556 333 737 370 556 584 333 737 552 400 549 333 333 333 576 537 278 333 333 365 556 834 834 834 611 667 667 667 667 667 667 1000 722 667 667 667 667 278 278 278 278 722 722 778 778 778 778 778 584 778 722 722 722 722 667 667 611 556 556 556 556 556 556 889 500 556 556 556 556 278 278 278 278 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 549 611 556 556 556 556 500 556 500 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /FontDescriptor 63 0 R >> endobj 63 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /Arial /Flags 32 /FontBBox [ -250 -212 1216 1000 ] /MissingWidth 277 /StemV 80 /StemH 80 /ItalicAngle 0 /CapHeight 905 /XHeight 453 /Ascent 905 /Descent -212 /Leading 150 /MaxWidth 1013 /AvgWidth 441 >> endobj 2 0 obj [ /PDF /Text ] endobj 5 0 obj << /Kids [4 0 R 10 0 R 13 0 R 20 0 R 23 0 R 26 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 30 0 obj << /Kids [29 0 R 35 0 R 38 0 R 41 0 R 44 0 R 47 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 51 0 obj << /Kids [50 0 R 54 0 R 57 0 R 64 0 R 67 0 R 70 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 74 0 obj << /Kids [73 0 R 77 0 R 80 0 R 83 0 R 86 0 R 89 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 93 0 obj << /Kids [92 0 R 96 0 R 99 0 R 102 0 R 105 0 R 108 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 112 0 obj << /Kids [111 0 R 115 0 R 118 0 R 121 0 R 124 0 R 127 0 R ] /Count 6 /Type /Pages /Parent 143 0 R >> endobj 131 0 obj << /Kids [130 0 R 134 0 R 137 0 R 140 0 R ] /Count 4 /Type /Pages /Parent 144 0 R >> endobj 143 0 obj << /Kids [5 0 R 30 0 R 51 0 R 74 0 R 93 0 R 112 0 R ] /Count 36 /Type /Pages /Parent 145 0 R >> endobj 144 0 obj << /Kids [131 0 R ] /Count 4 /Type /Pages /Parent 145 0 R >> endobj 145 0 obj << /Kids [143 0 R 144 0 R ] /Count 40 /Type /Pages /MediaBox [ 0 0 612 792 ] >> endobj 1 0 obj << /Creator /CreationDate (D:20070801164944) /Title /Author /Producer (Acrobat PDFWriter 5.0 for Windows NT) >> endobj 3 0 obj << /Pages 145 0 R /Type /Catalog >> endobj xref 0 146 0000000000 65535 f 0000268778 00000 n 0000267683 00000 n 0000269078 00000 n 0000006870 00000 n 0000267714 00000 n 0000259564 00000 n 0000260653 00000 n 0000000019 00000 n 0000006850 00000 n 0000014485 00000 n 0000006988 00000 n 0000014464 00000 n 0000020011 00000 n 0000260913 00000 n 0000262009 00000 n 0000014605 00000 n 0000019990 00000 n 0000262279 00000 n 0000263380 00000 n 0000025663 00000 n 0000020155 00000 n 0000025642 00000 n 0000030209 00000 n 0000025795 00000 n 0000030188 00000 n 0000035153 00000 n 0000030329 00000 n 0000035132 00000 n 0000042704 00000 n 0000267823 00000 n 0000035273 00000 n 0000042683 00000 n 0000263651 00000 n 0000264751 00000 n 0000049052 00000 n 0000042837 00000 n 0000049031 00000 n 0000055978 00000 n 0000049185 00000 n 0000055957 00000 n 0000063511 00000 n 0000056111 00000 n 0000063490 00000 n 0000070103 00000 n 0000063644 00000 n 0000070082 00000 n 0000078134 00000 n 0000070236 00000 n 0000078113 00000 n 0000087443 00000 n 0000267934 00000 n 0000078267 00000 n 0000087422 00000 n 0000095390 00000 n 0000087588 00000 n 0000095369 00000 n 0000101953 00000 n 0000095535 00000 n 0000101932 00000 n 0000265018 00000 n 0000266084 00000 n 0000266342 00000 n 0000267429 00000 n 0000108940 00000 n 0000102110 00000 n 0000108919 00000 n 0000114829 00000 n 0000109061 00000 n 0000114808 00000 n 0000121015 00000 n 0000114962 00000 n 0000120994 00000 n 0000127335 00000 n 0000268045 00000 n 0000121160 00000 n 0000127314 00000 n 0000133857 00000 n 0000127480 00000 n 0000133836 00000 n 0000139702 00000 n 0000133990 00000 n 0000139681 00000 n 0000145513 00000 n 0000139823 00000 n 0000145492 00000 n 0000150576 00000 n 0000145634 00000 n 0000150555 00000 n 0000156309 00000 n 0000150733 00000 n 0000156288 00000 n 0000161249 00000 n 0000268156 00000 n 0000156454 00000 n 0000161228 00000 n 0000167385 00000 n 0000161370 00000 n 0000167364 00000 n 0000172414 00000 n 0000167518 00000 n 0000172392 00000 n 0000177655 00000 n 0000172536 00000 n 0000177633 00000 n 0000183489 00000 n 0000177778 00000 n 0000183467 00000 n 0000190974 00000 n 0000183612 00000 n 0000190952 00000 n 0000199763 00000 n 0000268270 00000 n 0000191097 00000 n 0000199741 00000 n 0000207010 00000 n 0000199899 00000 n 0000206988 00000 n 0000213982 00000 n 0000207134 00000 n 0000213960 00000 n 0000221154 00000 n 0000214130 00000 n 0000221132 00000 n 0000227039 00000 n 0000221290 00000 n 0000227017 00000 n 0000233517 00000 n 0000227175 00000 n 0000233495 00000 n 0000240396 00000 n 0000268388 00000 n 0000233653 00000 n 0000240374 00000 n 0000247185 00000 n 0000240532 00000 n 0000247163 00000 n 0000253335 00000 n 0000247321 00000 n 0000253313 00000 n 0000259428 00000 n 0000253471 00000 n 0000259406 00000 n 0000268490 00000 n 0000268603 00000 n 0000268681 00000 n trailer << /Size 146 /Root 3 0 R /Info 1 0 R /ID [] >> startxref 269129 %%EOF