Purpose: In current clinical practice, intelligibility of dysarthric speech is commonly assessed by speech-language therapists (SLTs), in most cases by the therapist caring for the patient being diagnosed. Since SLTs are familiar with dysarthria in general and with the speech of the individual patient to be assessed in particular, they have an adaptation advantage in understanding the patient's utterances. We examined whether and how listeners' assessments of communication-related speech parameters vary as a function of their familiarity with dysarthria in general and with the diagnosed patients in particular.
Method: Intelligibility, speech naturalness, and perceived listener effort were assessed in 20 persons with dysarthria (PWD). Patients' speech samples were judged by the individual treating therapists, five dysarthria experts who were unfamiliar with the patients, and crowdsourced naïve listeners. Adaptation effects were analyzed using (a) linear mixed models of overall scoring levels, (b) regression models of severity dependence, (c) network analyses of between-listener and between-parameter relationships, and (d) measures of intra- and interobserver consistency.
Results: Significant advantages of dysarthria experts over laypeople were found in all parameters. An overall advantage of the treating therapists over nonfamiliar experts was only seen in listening effort. Severity-dependent adaptation effects occurred in all parameters. The therapists' responses were heterogeneous and inconsistent with those of the unfamiliar experts and the naïve listeners.
Conclusions: The way SLTs evaluate communication-relevant speech parameters of the PWD whom they care for is influenced not only by adaptation benefits but also by therapeutic biases. This finding weakens the validity of assessments of communication-relevant speech parameters by the treating therapists themselves and encourages the development and use of alternative methods.