The present study evaluated methods by which speech samples for equal appearing interval scaling of articulation defectiveness could be prepared with a minimum time expenditure. Ten public school speech therapists rated 40 one minute edited and 40 unedited speech samples on a nine point equal-appearing interval scale. The speech samples were recordings of the conversational speech of 40 children, classified as having articulation defects, ranging in age from 6-12. The results indicated: (1) the average ratings for the unedited tapes is as reliable as the average rating for the edited tapes. (2) The agreement between judges and the mean scale values are essentially the same for the edited and unedited tapes. (3) There is no relation between time to make a rating and reliability. It was concluded that since the amount of preparation time for edited tapes is so much greater than for unedited tapes, that unedited speech samples are the more practical clinical tool and the ratings obtained will be as reliable as ratings for edited samples. (Author)