{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02120141342756184, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004711425206124852, 'mean_word_length': 5.692913385826771, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Word Recognition Versus Sentence Comprehension on a Speechreading Task

Using a key word scoring method and the CID Everyday Sentences Lists, Squires (1985) found a statistically significant improvement in speechreading scores following training. The present study re-analyzed Squires' data and found that her subjects increased their verbal output, their percentage correct of the stimulus words, their MLU, and their number of multi-word utterances. However, subjects did not improve their sentence comprehension, their syntactic correctness, or their overall response accuracy. Thus, present data indicate that a word scoring method does not necessarily reflect changes at the sentence or connected discourse levels. The need exists for valid and reliable speechreading materials that measure performance at levels above that of word recognition.