An investigation of list equivalency of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in interrupted broadband noise

American Journal of Audiology

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 23-28

  Stuart, Andrew ^a  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Interrupted noise; List equivalency; NU 6; Signal to noise ratio; Word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NOISE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 13444304699     PISSN: 10590889     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1059-0889(2004/005)     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. American National Standards Institute. (1999). Permissible ambient noise levels for audiometric test rooms (ANSI S3.1- 1999). New York: Author.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1996). Specifications for audiometers (ANSI S3.6-1996). New York: Author.
3. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Panel on Audiologic Assessment. (1997). Guidelines for audiologic screening. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
4. Bentler, R. A. (2000). List equivalency and test-retest reliability of the Speech in Noise test. American Journal of Audiology, 9, 84-100.
5. Bess, F. H. (1983). Clinical assessment of speech recognition. In D. F. Konkle & W. F. Rintelmann (Eds.), Principles of speech audiometry (pp. 127-202). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
6. Calearo, C., Teatini, G. P., & Pestalozza, G. (1962). Speech intelligibility in the presence of interrupted noise. Journal of Auditory Research, 2, 179-186.
7. Carhart, R., Tillman, T. W., & Johnson, K. R. (1966). Binaural masking of speech by periodically modulated noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 39, 1037-1050.
8. Chermak, G. D., Pederson, C. M., & Bendel, R. B. (1984). Equivalent forms and split-half reliability of the NU-CHIPS in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 196-201.
9. Chermak, G. D., Wagner, D. P., &, Bendel, R. B. (1988). Interlist equivalence of the Word Intelligibility by Picture Identification Test administered in broad-band noise. Audiology, 27, 324-333.
10. Cohen, R. L., & Keith, R. W. (1976). Use of low-pass noise in word recognition. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 19, 48-54.
11. Cooper, J. C., & Cutts, B. P. (1971). Speech discrimination in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 332-337.
12. Crystal, T. H., & House, A. S. (1988). Segmental durations in connected-speech signals: Current results. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83, 1553-1573.
13. Danhauer, J. L., Doyle, P. C., & Lucks, L. (1985). Effects of noise on NST and NU-6 stimuli. Ear and Hearing, 6, 266-269.
14. DeBow, A., & Green, W. B. (2000). A survey of Canadian audiologic practices: Pure tone and speech audiometry. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 24, 153-161.
15. de Laat, J. A. P. M., & Plomp, R. (1983). The reception threshold of interrupted speech for hearing impaired listeners. In R. Klinke & R. Hartman (Eds.), Hearing-Physiological bases and psychophysics (pp. 359-363). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
16. Dirks, D. D., & Bower, D. R. (1970). Effect of forward and backward masking on speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 47, 1003-1008.
17. Dirks, D. D., Wilson, R. H., & Bower, D. R. (1969). Effect of pulsed masking on selected speech materials. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 898-906.
18. Elangovan, S., & Stuart, A. (2004). Interactive effects of lowpass filtering and masking noise on word recognition. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19. Findlay, R. C. (1976). Auditory dysfunction accompanying noise-induced hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 374-380.
20. Gengel, R. W., Miller, L., & Rosenthal, E. (1981). Between and within listener variability to CID W-22 presented in noise. Ear and Hearing, 2, 78-81.
21. Hanks, W. D., & Johnson, G. D. (1998). HINT list equivalency using older listeners. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1335-1340.
22. Howard-Jones, P. A., & Rosen, S. (1993). The perception of speech in fluctuating noise. Acoustica, 78, 258-272.
23. Hurley, R. M., & Sells, J. P. (2003). An abbreviated word recognition protocol based on item difficulty. Ear and Hearing, 24, 111-118.
24. Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustic measurements. Word, 20, 384-422.
26. Loven, F. C., & Hawkins, D. B. (1983). Interlist equivalency of the CID W-22 word lists presented in quiet and in noise. Ear and Hearing, 4, 91-97.
27. Mackersie, C., Neuman, A. C., & Levitt, H. (1999). Response time and word recognition using a modified-rhyme monitoring task: List equivalency and time-order effects. Ear and Hearing, 20, 515-520.
28. Martin, F. N., Champlin, C. A., & Chambers, J. A. (1998). Seventh survey of audiometric practices in the United States. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 9, 95-104.
29. Mendel, L. L., & Danhauer, J. L. (1997). Audiologic evaluation and management and speech perception assessment. San Diego, CA: Singular.
30. Miller, G. A. (1947). The masking of speech. Psychological Bulletin, 44, 105-129.
31. Miller, G. A., & Licklider, C. R. (1950). The intelligibility of interrupted speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 167-173.
32. Olsen, W. O., & Matkin, N. D. (1991). Speech audiometry. In W. F. Rintelmann (Ed.), Hearing assessment (2nd ed., pp. 99-140). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
33. Pollack, I. (1954). Masking of speech by repeated bursts of noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 26, 1053-1055.
34. Pollack, I. (1955). Masking by periodically interrupted noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 353-355.
35. Raffin, M. J., & Thornton, A. R. (1980). Confidence levels for differences between speech-discrimination scores. A research note. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 23, 5-18.
36. Rintelmann, W. F., Schumaier, D. R., Jetty, A. J., Burchfield, S. A., Beasley, D. S., Mosher, N.A., et al. (1974). Six experiments on speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllables. Journal of Auditory Research, 2(Suppl.), 1-30.
37. Ripply, J. V., Dancer, J. E., &, Pittenger, J. B. (1983). List equivalency of the CID Everyday Sentences (Harris Revision) under three signal-to-noise ratios. Ear and Hearing, 4, 251-254.
38. Schubert, G. W., & Stenhjem, B. W. (1978). A reliability study of the Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock Test of Auditory Discrimination with learning disabled children. Acta Symbolica, 7-9, 43-56.
39. Schwartz, D. M., Bess, F. H., & Larson, V. D. (1977). Split half reliability of two word discrimination tests as a function of primary-to-secondary ratio. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 42, 440-445.
40. Scott, T., Green, W. B., & Stuart, A. (2001). Interactive effects of low-pass filtering and masking noise on word recognition. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 12, 437-444.
41. Sherbecoe, R. L., Studebaker, G. A., & Crawford, M. R. (1993). Speech spectra for six recorded monosyllabic word lists. Ear and Hearing, 14, 104-111.
42. Signal Technology Inc. (1989). Interactive Laboratory System (Version 6.1) [Computer software]. Goleta, CA: Author.
43. Stockley, K. B., & Green, W. B. (2000). Interlist equivalency of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in quiet and noise with adult hearing-impaired individuals. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 91-96.
44. Stoppenbach, D. T., Craig, J. M., Wiley, T. L., & Wilson R. H. (1999). Word recognition performance for Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 word lists in quiet and in competing message. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 429-435.
45. Stuart, A., & Carpenter, M. (1999). Unilateral auditory temporal resolution deficit: A case study. Journal of Communication Disorders, 32, 317-325.
46. Stuart, A., & Phillips, D. P. (1996). Word recognition in continuous and interrupted broadband noise by young normal-hearing, older normal-hearing, and presbyacusic listeners. Ear and Hearing, 17, 478-489.
47. Stuart, A., & Phillips, D. P. (1997). Word recognition in continuous noise, interrupted noise, and in quiet by normal-hearing listeners at two sensation levels. Scandinavian Audiology, 26, 112-116.
48. Stuart, A., & Phillips, D. P. (1998). Deficits in auditory temporal resolution revealed by a comparison of word recognition under interrupted and continuous noise masking. Seminars in Hearing, 19, 333-344.
49. Stuart, A., Phillips, D. P., & Green, W. B. (1995). Word recognition performance in continuous and interrupted noise by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners. American Journal of Otology, 16, 658-663.
50. Stuart, A., Green, W. B., Phillips, D. P., & Stenstrom, R. (1994). List equivalency of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in quiet and in continuous broad band noise. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 18, 121-125.
51. Studebaker, G. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455-462.
52. Surr, R. K., & Schwartz, D. M. (1980). Effects of multitalker competing speech on variability of the California Consonant Test. Ear and Hearing, 1, 319-323.
53. Thornton, A. R, & Raffin, M. J. (1978). Speech-discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 21, 507-518.
54. Tillman, T. W., & Carhart, R. (1966). An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (Tech. Rep. No. SAM-TDR-66-55). Brooks Air Force Base, TX: USAF School of Aerospace Medicine.
55. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (1989). Speech recognition and identification materials, Disc 1 [CD]. Long Beach, CA: Author.
56. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (1991). Speech recognition and identification materials, Disc 1.1 [CD]. Long Beach, CA: Author.
57. van Santen, J. P. H. (1992). Contextual effects on vowel duration. Speech Communication, 11, 513-546.
58. van Son, R. J. J. H., & van Santen, J. P. H. (1997). Strong interaction between factors influencing consonant duration. In G. Kokkinakis, N. Fakotakis, & E. Dermatas (Eds.), Proceedings Eurospeech '97: Vol. 1 (pp. 319-322). Rhodes, Greece: European Speech Communication Association.
59. Wilson, R. H., & Carhart, R. (1969). Influence of pulsed masking on the threshold for spondees. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 998-1010.
60. Wilson, R. H., Coley, K. E., Haenel, J. L., & Browning, K. M. (1976). Northwestern University Auditory Test No.6: Normative and comparative intelligibility functions. Journal of the American Audiology Society, 1, 221-228.
61. Wilson, R. H., & Punch, J. L. (1971). Masked spondee thresholds: Variable duty cycle and mask intensity. Journal of Auditory Research, 11, 270-275.