Quantifying the contribution of audibility to recognition of compression-amplified speech

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 12-20

  Souza, Pamela E ^a   Turner, Christopher W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; HEARING ACUITY; HEARING AID; HUMAN; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

AGED; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHONETICS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0033005895     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199902000-00002     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. American National Standards Institute (1996a). Specification for audiometers. (ANSI S3.6-1996). New York: ANSI.
2. American National Standards Institute (1996b). Specification of hearing aid characteristics. (ANSI S3.22-1996) New York: ANSI.
3. Boothroyd, A., Springer, N., Smith, L., & Schulman, J. (1988). Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 31, 362-376.
4. Cox, R. M., & McDaniel, D. M. (1986). Reference equivalent threshold levels for pure tones and 1/3 octave noise bands: Insert earphone and TDH-49 earphone. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, 443-446.
5. Crain, T. R., & Van Tasell, D. (1994). The effect of peak clipping on the speech recognition threshold. Ear and Hearing, 15, 443-453.
6. DeGennaro, S., Braida, L. D., & Durlach, N. I. (1986). Multichannel syllabic compression for severely impaired listeners. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 23, 17-24.
7. Dirks, D. D., Ahlstrom, J., & Noffsinger, P. D. (1993). Preferred frequency response for two- and three-channel amplification systems. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 30, 305-317.
8. Dirks, D. D., Bell, T. S., Rossman, R. N., & Kincaid, G. E. (1986). Articulation index predictions of contextually dependent words. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 82-92.
9. Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1981). Applied regression analysis (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
10. Drullman, R. (1995). Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 585-592.
11. Dubno, J. R., & Dirks, D. D. (1989). Auditory filter characteristics and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 1666-1675.
12. Dubno, J. R., Dirks, D. D., & Schaefer, A. B. (1989). Stop-consonant recognition for normal-hearing listeners and listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. II: Articulation index predictions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 355-364.
13. Dunn, H. K., & White, S. D. (1940). Statistical measurements on conversational speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 11, 278-288.
14. Festen, J. M., van Dijkhuizen, J. N., & Plomp, R. (1990). Considerations on adaptive gain and frequency response in hearing aids. Acta Otolaryngologica Supplement, 469, 196-201.
15. Fletcher, H. (1953). Speech and hearing in communication. New York: Van Nostrand.
16. Fletcher, H., & Galt, R. H. (1950). The perception of speech and its relation to telephony. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 89-151.
17. Fortune, T. W. (1997). Real ear compression ratios: The effects of venting and adaptive release time. American Journal of Audiology, 6, 55-63.
18. French, N. R., & Steinberg, J. C. (1947). Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 19, 90-119.
19. Houtgast, T., & Steeneken, H. J. M. (1985). A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, 1069-1077.
20. Humes, L. E., Dirks, D. D., Bell, T. S., Ahlstrom, C., & Kincaid, G. E. (1986). Application of the articulation index and the speech transmission index to the recognition of speech by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 447-462.
21. Kamm, C. A., Dirks, D. D., & Bell, T. S. (1985). Speech recognition and the Articulation Index for normal and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, 281-288.
22. Moore, B. C. J. (1996). Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. Ear and Hearing, 17, 133-161.
23. Moore, B. C. J., & Glasberg, B. R. (1986). A comparison of two-channel and single-channel compression hearing aids. Audiology, 25, 210-226.
24. Pavlovic, C. V. (1984). Use of the articulation index for assessing residual auditory function in listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 1253-1258.
25. Pavlovic, C. V. (1989). Speech spectrum considerations and speech intelligibility predictions in hearing aid evaluations. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 3-8.
26. Pavlovic, C. V. (1993). Problems in the prediction of speech recognition performance of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals. In Studebaker, G. A., & Hochberg, I. (Eds.), Acoustical factors affecting hearing aid performance (2nd ed.) (pp. 221-234). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
27. Pavlovic, C. V., & Studebaker, G. A. (1984). An evaluation of some assumptions underlying the articulation index. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 1606-1612.
28. Pavlovic, C. V., Studebaker, G. A., & Sherbecoe, R. L. (1986). An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 50-57.
29. Plomp, R. (1988). The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83, 2322-2327.
30. Rankovic, C. M. (1991). An application of the articulation index to hearing aid fitting. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 391-402.
31. Rosen, S. (1989). Temporal information in speech and its relevance to cochlear implants. In Proceedings of the conference: Cochlear implant: Acquisitions and controversies, Toulouse, France.
32. Snedecor, G. W., & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical methods (7th ed.). Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.
33. Souza, P. E., & Turner, C. W. (1998). Multichannel compression, temporal cues and audibility. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 41, 315-326.
34. Steeneken, H. J. M., & Houtgast, T. (1980). A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 318-326.
35. Stelmachowicz, P., Lewis, D., Kalberer, A., & Creutz, T. (1994). Situational hearing-aid response profile users manual (SHARP, v. 2.0). Omaha, NE: Boys Town National Research Hospital.
36. Stone, M. A., & Moore, B. C. J. (1992). Syllabic compression: effective compression ratios for signals modulated at different rates. British Journal of Audiology, 26, 351-361.
37. Studebaker, G. A., & Marincovich, P. J. (1989). Importance-weighted audibility and the recognition of hearing aid-processed speech. Ear and Hearing, 10, 101-108.
38. Van Tasell, D. J., Soli, S. D., Kirby, V. M., & Widin, G. P. (1987). Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32, 1152-1160.
39. Verschuure, J., Maas, A. J. J., Stikvoort, E., de Jong, R. M., Goedegebure, A., & Dreschler, W. (1996). Compression and its effect on the speech signal. Ear and Hearing, 17, 162-175.