Application of frequency importance functions to directivity for prediction of benefit in uniform fields

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 473-486

  Ricketts, Todd A ^a,c   Henry, Paula P ^b   Hornsby, Benjamin W Y ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b U S ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^c Medical Center East   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ARTICULATION INDEX WEIGHTED DIRECTIVITY INDEX; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; FILTER; FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; FREQUENCY MODULATION; HEARING AID; HUMAN; NOISE; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PREDICTION; RISK FACTOR; SCORING SYSTEM; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 27144505173     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.aud.0000179691.21547.01     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Agnew, J., & Block, M. (1997). HINT thresholds for dual-microphone BTE. Hearing Review, 4, 29-26.
2. American National Standards Institute (ANSI S3.5-1997) (1997). The calculation of the speech intelligibility index 1997. New York, NY.
3. American National Standards Institute (ANSI S3.35-2004) (2004). Method of measurement of performance characteristics of hearing aids under simulated real-ear working conditions. Mellville, NY.
4. Beranek L. L. (1949). Acoustic Measurements. London: John Wiley and Sons.
5. Beranek L. L. (1954). Acoustics. McGraw-Hill Electrical and Electronic Engineering Series. New York: McGraw Hill.
6. Carhart, R., & Tillman, T. W. (1970). Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Acta Otolaryngology (Stockholm), 91, 273-279.
7. Ching, T. Y. C., Dillon, H., & Byrne, D. (1998). Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103, 1128-1140.
8. Cooper, J. C., & Cutts, B. P. (1971). Speech Discrimination in Noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 332-337.
9. Cornelisse, L. E., Seewald, R. C., & Jamieson, D. G. (1995). The input/output formula: a theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 1854-1864.
10. Cox, R., Alexander, G., & Gilmore, C. (1998). Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST). Ear and Hearing, 8, 119s-126s.
11. Cox, R., Alexander, G., Gilmore, C., & Pusakulich, K. (1988). Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear and Hearing, 9, 198-207.
12. Dirks, D. D., Morgan, D. E., & Dubno, J. R. (1982). A procedure for quantifying the effects of noise on speech recognition. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 114-123.
13. Divenyi, P. L., & Haupt, K. M. (1997). Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. III. Factor representation. Ear and Hearing, 18, 189-201.
14. Dubno, J. R., & Schaefer, A. B. (1995). Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 1165-1174.
15. Duggirala, V., Studebaker, G. A., Pavlovic, C. V., & Sherbecoe, R. L. (1988). Frequency importance functions for a feature recognition test material. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83, 2372-2382.
16. Fabry, D. A., & Van Tasell, D. J. (1986). Masked and filtered simulation of hearing loss: effects on consonant recognition. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 170-178.
17. Fletcher, H., & Gait, R. H. (1950). The perception of speech and its relation to telephony. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 89-151.
18. Frank, T., & Gooden, R. G. (1973). The effect of hearing aid microphone types on speech scores in a background of multi-talker noise. Maico Audiology Library Series, 11, 1-4.
19. French, N. R., & Steinberg, J. C. (1947). Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 19, 90-119.
20. Gravel, J. S., Fausel, N., Liskow, C., & Chobot, J. (1999). Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology. Ear and Hearing, 20, 1-11.
21. Groen, J. J. (1969). Social hearing handicap: Its measurement by speech audiometry in noise. International Journal of Audiology, 8, 82-183.
22. Harris, C. M. & Batchelor C (1991). Sound in Enclosed Spaces in Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Third Edition, C. M. Harris (ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991.
23. Hawkins, D. B., & Yacullo, W. S. (1984). Signal-to-noise ratio advantage of binaural hearing aids and directional microphones under different levels of reverberation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 278-286.
24. Hogan, C., & Turner, C. (1998). High frequency audibility: Benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the acoustical Society of America, 104, 432-441.
25. Hornsby, B., & Ricketts, T. (2002). The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1706-1717.
26. Humes, L. E. (2002). Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112(3 Pt 1), 1112-1132.
27. Humes, L. E., Dirks, D. D., Bell, T. S., Ahlstrom, C., & Kincaid, G. E. (1986). Application of the Articulation Index to the recognition of speech by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 447-462.
28. Killion, M. C. (1997). SNR loss: I can hear what people say, but I can't understand them. Hearing Review, 4, 10-14.
29. Killion, M. C., & Christensen, L. A. (1998). The case of the missing dots: AI and SNR loss. Hearing Journal, 51, 32, 34, 36, 40-41, 44, 46-47.
30. Killion, M. C., Schulien, R., Christensen, L., Fabry, D., Revit, L., Niquette, P., & Chung, K. (1998). Real world performance of an ITE directional microphone. Hearing Journal, 51, 24-26, 30, 32-36, 38.
31. Lee, L. W., & Humes, L. E. (1993). Evaluating a speech-reception threshold model for hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 586-589.
32. Lurquin, P., & Rafhay, S. (1996). Intelligibility in noise using multimicrophone hearing aids. Acta Otorhinolaryngology Belgium, 50, 103-109.
33. Madison, T. K., & Hawkins, D. B. (1983). The signal-to-noise ratio advantage of directional microphones. Hearing Instruments, 34, 18-49.
34. Mueller, H. G., & Johnson, R. M. (1979). The effects of various front-to-back ratios on the performance of directional microphone hearing aids. Journal of the American Audiology Society, 5, 30-34.
35. Mueller, H. G., & Killion, M. C. (1990). An easy method for calculating the articulation index. Hearing Journal, 43, 14-17.
36. Pavlovic, C. (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.
37. Pavlovic, C. (1987). Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83, 413-423.
38. Pavlovic, C., Studebaker, G., & Scherbecoe, R. (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.
39. Pearsons, K. S., Bennett, R. L., & Fidell, S. (1976). Speech levels in various environments. Report to the Office of Resources it Development, Environmental Protection Agency, BBN Report # 3281.
40. Plomp, R. (1976). Binaural and monaural speech intelligibility of connected discourse in reverberation as a function of azimuth of a single competing sound source (speech or noise). Acustica, 34, 200-211.
41. Plomp, R. (1986). A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 146-154.
42. Ricketts, T. A. (2000a). Impact of noise source configuration on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear and Hearing, 21, 194-205.
43. Ricketts, T. A. (2000b). Directivity quantification in hearing aids: Fitting and measurement effects. Ear and Hearing, 21, 45-58.
44. Ricketts, T. A., & Dahr, S. (1999). Comparison of performance across three directional hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 180-189.
45. Ricketts, T. A., & Dittberner, A. B. (2002). Directional Amplification for Improved Signal-to-Noise Ratio: Strategies, Measurement, and Limitations. In M. Valente (ed.) Strategies For Selecting And Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings (2nd Edition), New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, pp 274-346.
46. Ricketts, T. A., & Hornsby, B. W. Y. (2003). Distance and reverberation effects on directional benefit. Ear and Hearing, 24, 472-484.
47. Ricketts, T. A., Hornsby, B. W. Y. (in press). Directional Hearing Aid Benefit in Listeners with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss. International Journal of Audiology.
48. Ricketts, T. A., Lindley, G., & Henry, P. (2001). Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear and Hearing, 22, 348-361.
49. Schum, D. (1996). Speech understanding in background noise. In: Valente M, ed. Hearing Aids: Standards, Options, and Limitations. New York: Thieme, 368-406.
50. Sherbecoe, R. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (2002). Audibility-index functions for the connected speech test. Ear and Hearing, 23, 385-398.
51. Sherbecoe, R. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (2003). Audibility-index predictions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the connected speech test. Ear and Hearing, 24, 71-88.
52. Stone, M. A., & Moore, B. C. (2003). Tolerable hearing aid delays, III: Effects on speech production and perception of across-frequency variation in delay. Ear and Hearing, 24, 175-183.
53. Studebaker, G., Scherbecoe, R., McDaniel, D., & Gray, G. (1997). Age-related changes in monosyllabic word recognition performance when audibility is held constant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 8, 150-162.
54. Studebaker, G. A., Gilmore, C., & Sherbecoe, R. L. (1993). Performance-intensity functions at absolute and masked thresholds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 93, 3418-3421.
55. Studebaker, G. A., Pavlovic, C. V., Scherbecoe, R. L. (1987). A frequency importance function for continuous discourse. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 81, 1130-1138.
56. Studebaker, G. A., Sherbecoe, R. L. (1991). Frequency-importance and transfer functions for recorded CID W-22 word lists. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 427-438.
57. Sung, G. S., Sung, R. J., & Angelelli, R. M. (1975). Directional microphones in hearing aids. Effects on speech discrimination in noise. Acta Otolaryngology, 101, 316-319.
58. Sutter, A. H. (1985). Speech recognition in noise by individuals with mild hearing impairments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 78, 887-900.
59. Turner, C., & Cummings, K. (1999). Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. American Journal of Audiology, 8, 47-56.
60. Valente, M., Fabry, D. A., & Potts, L. G. (1995). Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 6, 440-449.
61. Voss, T. (1997). Clinical evaluation of multi-microphone hearing instruments. Hearing Review, 36, 45-74.
62. Webster, J. (1979). Interpretations of speech and noise characteristics of NTID learning centers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66(Suppl), S37.
63. Zurek, P. M., & Delhorne, L. A. (1987). Consonant reception in noise by listeners with mild and moderate sensorineural hearing impairment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 82, 1548-1559.