The CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R as Predictors of (C)AP Skills and (C)APD

Abstract

Purpose In this study, the authors investigated the relationships between 3 tests used to screen for (central) auditory processing disorder ([C]APD)—the Children’s Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS; W. J. Smoski, M. A. Brunt, & J. C. Tannahill, 1998), the Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (SIFTER; K. Anderson, 1989), and the Test of Auditory Perceptual Skills—Revised (TAPS–R; M. Y. Gardner, 1997)—and 4 tests used to diagnostically assess for (C)APD: Low-Pass Filtered Speech (LPFS), Competing Sentences (CS), Two-Pair Dichotic Digits (DD), and Frequency Patterns With Linguistic Report (FP). Method The screening and diagnostic (C)APD tests results of 104 children (71 boys, 33 girls) aged 6.9–14.3 years were reviewed following their attendance at a university clinic in Brisbane, Australia. Results Pearson’s product–moment correlation coefficient analysis showed weak ( r = .22, p < .05) to moderate ( r = .47, p < .01) correlations predominantly between the short-term and working memory test results of the TAPS–R and the DD and FP test results of the (C)AP test battery. Linear and binary logistic regression analyses showed a poor ability of the CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R test results to predict the individual LPFS, CS, DD, or FP test results or the overall risk for (C)APD. Conclusion The CHAPS, SIFTER, and TAPS–R should be used to highlight concerns about a child but not to determine whether a diagnostic (C)AP assessment is particularly warranted.