The Use of Digit Triplets to Evaluate Word-Recognition Abilities in Multitalker Babble

Seminars in Hearing

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 93-111

  Wilson, Richard H ^a   Weakley, Deborah G ^b  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b East Tennessee State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory perception; Hearing loss; Speech perception; Word recognition in multitalker babble

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEARING DISORDER; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NOISE; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; SPEECH; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 1842733017     PISSN: 07340451     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-823051     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Hirsh IJ. Binaural hearing aids: A review of some experiments. J Speech Hear Disord 1950;15:114-123
2. Carhart R, Tillman TW. Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing loss. Arch Otolaryngol 1970;91:273-279
3. Keith RW, Talis HP. The use of speech in noise in diagnostic audiometry. J Aud Res 1970;10:201-204
4. Tillman TW, Carhart R, Olsen WO. Hearing aid efficiency in a competing speech situation. J Speech Hear Res 1970;13:789-811
5. Olsen WO, Noffsinger D, Kurdziel S. Speech discrimination in quiet and in white noise by patients with peripheral and central lesions. Acta Otolaryngol 1975;80:375-382
6. Dubno JR, Dirks DD, Morgan DE. Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1984;76:87-96
7. Gordon-Salant S. Age-related differences in speech recognition performance as a function of test format and paradigm. Ear Hear 1987;8:277-282
8. Beattie RC. Word recognition functions for the CID W-22 test in multitalker noise for normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J Speech Hear Disord 1989;54:20-32
9. Souza PE, Turner CW. Masking of speech in young and elderly listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 1994;37:655-661
10. Divenyi PL, Haupt KM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and lateral asymmetry effects. Ear Hear 1997a;18:42-61
11. Divenyi PL, Haupt KM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. II. Correlation analysis. Ear Hear 1997b;18:100-113
12. Divenyi PL, Haupt KM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. III. Factor representation. Ear Hear 1997c;18:189-201
13. Plomp R, Duquesnoy AJ. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid. Scand Audiol 1982;15:95-111
14. Martin FN, Champlin CA, Chambers JA. Seventh survey of audiometric practices in the United States. J Am Acad Audiol 1998;9:95-104
15. Mueller HG. Speech audiometry and hearing aid fittings: Going steady or casual acquaintances. Hear J 2001;54:19-29
16. Plomp R. Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1978;63:533-549
17. Moore BCJ, Huss M, Vickers DA, Glasberg BR, Alcántara JI. A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol 2000;34:205-224
18. Cherry C. On Human Communication, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1966
19. Cherry EC. Some experiments on the recognition of speech with one and with two ears. J Acoust Soc Am 1953;25:975-979
20. Tillman TW, Carhart R. An Expanded Test for Speech Discrimination Utilizing CNC Monosyllabic Words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. Brooks Air Force Base, TX: USAF School of Aerospace Medicine Technical Report; 1966
21. Department of Veterans Affairs Speech Recognition and Identification Materials, Disc 2.0. Mountain Home, TN: VA Medical Center; 1998
22. Wilson RH. Development of a speech in multitalker babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance. J Am Acad Audiol 2003;14:453-470
23. Wilson RH, Abrams HB, Pillion AL. A word-recognition task in multitalker babble usingades cending presentation mode from 24-dB S/B to 0-dB S/B. J Rehabil Res Dev 2003; (in press)
24. Smits C, Kapteyn TS, Houtgast T. Development and validation of an automatic SRT screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol 2003;43:15-28
25. Wilson RH, Jaffe MS. Interactions of Age, Ear, and Stimulus Complexity on Dichotic Digit Recognition. J Am Acad Audiol 1996;7:358-364
26. Strouse AL, Wilson RH. Recognition of 1-, 2-, and 3-pair Dichotic Digits under Free and Directed Recall. J Am Acad Audiol 1999;10:557-571
27. Kimura D. Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Can J Psychol 1961;15:166-171
28. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 1956;63:81-97
29. Miller GA, Heise GA, Lichten W. The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. J Exp Psychol 1951;41:329-335
30. Egan J. Articulation testing methods. Laryngoscope 1948;58:955-991
31. Miller GA. Language and Communication. New York: McGraw Hill; 1951
32. Ramkissoon I, Proctor A, Lansing CR, Bilger RC. Digit speech recognition thresholds (SRT) for non-native speakers of English. Am J Audiol 2002;11:23-28
33. Sperry JL, Wiley TL, Chial MR. Word recognition performance in various background competitors. J Am Acad Audiol 1997;8:71-80
34. Finney DJ. Statistical Method in Biological Assay. London: C. Griffen; 1952
35. Department of Veterans Affairs. Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment, CD 2.0. Mountain Home, TN: VA Medical Center; 1998
36. American National Standards Institute. Specification for Audiometers (ANSI S3.6-1996). New York: Author; 1996
37. Wilson RH, Margolis RH. Measurement of the auditory thresholds for speech stimuli. In: Konkle D, Rintelmann W, eds. Principles of Speech Audiometry Baltimore, MD: University Park Press; 1983:79-126
38. Versveld NJ, Daalder L, Festen JM, Houtgast T. Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:1671-1684