Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Apr 13.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Linguist Phon. 2010 Dec 15;25(4):265–286. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2010.528822

Table 3.

The Error Consistency Index (ECI) calculated for each child in the study. The ECI was determined by observing how many different sounds each child produced for his treated sound both pre-treatment and at the two-week post-treatment probe session. The ECI value included omissions of the sound (e.g., “car” produced as [kɑ]), as well as correct productions of the treated sound

Child Condition Pre-Tx Treatment Sound Post-Tx Treatment Sound Treatment Sound Proportion Change (Negative Values) Pre-Tx Untreated Sounds* Post-Tx Untreated Sounds* Untreated Sounds Proportion Change (Negative Values)
1 NW 2.00 1.00 0.50 1.67 1.00 0.40
2 NW 7.00 3.00 0.57 4.91 2.82 0.43
3 RW 3.00 2.00 0.33 3.13 1.38 0.56
4 RW 8.00 8.00 0.00 5.42 6.12 −0.13

The Error Consistency Index does include the correct sound productions, if produced by each child. The ideal Error Consistency Index number is 1.0, meaning that only one sound exemplar was produced for each sound (e.g., Child 1 produced the target treated sound during the post-treatment probe).

*

The number of sounds varied depending on how many were produced with less than 50% accuracy during the pre-treatment probe sessions