Use of a Simultaneous Sentence Perception Test to Enhance Sensitivity to Ease of Listening

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 675-682

  Mackersie, Carol L ^a   Boothroyd, Arthur ^b   Prida, Tammy ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b San Diego State University ^*

Author keywords

Ease of listening; Hearing aids; Peak clipping; Sentence perception; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING AID; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NOISE; PHYSIOLOGY; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; RANDOMIZATION; REACTION TIME; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING AIDS; HUMANS; NOISE; RANDOM ALLOCATION; REACTION TIME; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0034200922     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4303.675     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Baer, T., Moore, B. C. J., & Gatehouse, S. (1993). Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: Effects on intelligibility, quality, and response time. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 30, 49-72.
2. Bilger, R. C., Nuetzel, J. M., Rabinowitz, W. M., & Rzeczkowski, C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27, 32-48.
3. Bode, D. L., & Kasten, R. N. (1971). Hearing aid distortion and consonant identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 14, 323-331.
4. Boff, K. R., & Lincoln, J. E. (Eds.). (1988). Report 8.313-Noise masking of speech: Effect of peak clipping. Engineering data compendium: Human perception and performance. Dayton, OH: Wright-Patterson AFB: Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory. [http://www.dtic.dla.mil/iac/cseriac/cashe/313html]
5. Boothroyd, A., Hnath-Chisolm, T., Hanin, L., & Kishon-Rabin, L. (1988). Voice fundamental frequency as an auditory supplement to the speechreading of sentences. Ear and Hearing, 9, 306-312.
6. Boothroyd, A., & Orunganti, B. (1995, September). Assessing ease of listening: Evaluation of a simultaneous sentence task. Presented at the National Institutes of Health 1st Biennial Conference on Hearing Aid Research and Development, Washington, DC.
7. Broadbent, D. E. (1958). Perception and communication. London: Pergamon.
8. Crain, T., & Van Tasell, D. (1994). Effect of peak clipping on speech recognition threshold. Ear and Hearing, 15, 443-453.
9. Downs, D. W., & Crum, M. A. (1978). Processing demands during auditory learning under degraded listening conditions. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 21, 702-714.
10. Feuerstein, J. F. (1992). Monaural versus binaural hearing: Ease of listening, word recognition, and attentional effort. Ear and Hearing, 13, 80-86.
11. Gatehouse, S. (1993). Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy ofAudiology, 4, 296-306.
12. Gatehouse, S., & Gordon, J. (1990). Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. British Journal of Audiology, 24, 63-68.
13. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14. Licklider, J. (1946). Effects of amplitude distortion upon the intelligibility of speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 18, 429-434.
15. Mackersie, C., Neuman, A., & Levitt, A. (1999) A comparison of response time and word recognition measures using a word monitoring and closed-set identification task. Ear and Hearing, 20, 140-148.
16. Medwetsky, L. (1994). The importance of spatial and talker cues in competing sentence recall. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York.
17. Moray, N. (1967). Where is capacity limited? A survey and a model. Acta Psychologica, 27, 84-92.
18. Orunganti, B. (1995). Preparation of simultaneous sentence test materials. Lexington Research Center Internal Report #RERC02.AB.
19. Rakerd, B., Seitz, P. F., & Whearty, M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive demands of speech listening for people with hearing losses. Ear and Hearing, 17, 97-106.
20. Saunders, G., & Levitt, H. (1991) An automated true-false reaction-time test for evaluating noise-reduction systems. Presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Convention, Atlanta.
21. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455-462.