Methodology for quantifying perceptual effects from noise suppression systems

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 44, Issue 12, 2005, Pages 721-732

  Dahlquist, Martin ^a,d   Lutman, Mark E ^b   Wood, Sally ^c   Leijon, Arne ^a  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^c MRC INSTITUTE OF HEARING RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^d KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Paired comparisons; Sound quality noise reduction

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NOISE REDUCTION; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOUND; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ALGORITHMS; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 28844507947     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14992020500271712     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bench, J., Kowal, A. & Bamford, J.M. 1979. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially hearing children. Br J Audiol, 13, 108-112.
2. Bentler, R.A., Niebuhr, D.P., Getta, J.P. & Anderson, C.V. 1993. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. I: Objective measures. J Speech Hear Res, 36, 808-819.
3. Bentler, R.A., Niebuhr, D.P., Getta, J.P. & Anderson, C.V. 1993. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. II: Subjective measures. J Speech Hear Res, 36, 820-831.
4. Boymans, M. & Dreschler, W. 2000. Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Audiology, 39, 260-268.
5. Boymans, M., Schoneveld, P. & Verschuure, J. 1999. Clinical evaluation of a full-digital in-the-ear hearing instrument. Audiology, 38, 99-108.
6. Dahlquist, M. & Leijon, A. 2003. Paired-comparison rating of sound quality using MAP parameter estimation for data analysis. In: AQS-2003. First ISCA tutorial & research workshop on auditory quality of systems, pp. 79-84.
7. Dillon, H. & Lovegrove, R. 1993. Single-microphone noise reduction systems for hearing aids: A review and an evaluation. In G.A. Studebaker & I. Hochberg (eds.) Acoustical factors affecting hearing aid performance. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 353-372.
8. Eisenberg, L.S., Dirks, D.D. & Gornbein, J.A. 1997. Subjective judgments of speech clarity by paired comparisons and category rating. Ear Hear, 18, 294-306.
9. Elberling, C., Ludvigsen, C. & Keidser, G. 1993. The design and testing of a noise reduction algorithm based on spectral subtraction. Scand Audiol Suppl, 38, 39-49.
10. Ellermeier, W. & Zimmer, K. 2003. Using psychological choice models to investigate overall sound quality. In: AQS-2003. First ISCA tutorial & research workshop on auditory quality of systems, pp. 71-78.
11. Gatehouse, S. 1992. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatisation to frequency responses: Evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 92, 1258-1268.
12. Gescheider, G.A. 1985. Psychophysics. Method, theory and application. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Hagerman, B. & Kinnefors, C. 1995. Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise. Scand Audiol, 24, 71-77.
14. Jamieson, D.G., Brennan, R.L. & Cornelisse, L.E. 1995. Evaluation of a speech enhancement strategy with normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear, 16(3), 274-286.
15. Levitt, H. 1971. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49, 467-477.
16. Levitt, H. 1993. Digital hearing aids. In G.A. Studebaker & I. Hochberg (eds.) Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 317-335.
17. Levitt, H., Bakke, M., Kates, J., Neuman, A., Schwander, T., et al. 1993. Signal processing for hearing impairment. Scand Audiol Suppl, 38, 7-19.
18. Lockwood, P. & Boudy, J. 1992. Experiments with a non-linear spectral subtracter (NSS), Hidden-Markov models and the projection, for robust speech recognition. Speech Commun, 11(2-3), 215-228.
19. Ludvigsen, C., Elberling, C. & Keidser, G. 1993. Evaluation of a noise reduction method - a comparison between observed scores and scores predicted from STI. Scand Audiol Suppl, 38, 50-55.
20. Marzinzik, M. 2000. Noise reduction schemes for digital hearing aids and their use for the hearing-impaired. Doctoral thesis. University of Oldenburg.
21. Moore, B.C.J. & Glasberg, B.R. 1996. A revision of Zwicker's loudness model. Acta Acustica, 82, 335-345.
22. Pearsons, K.S., Bennet, R.L., & Fidell, S. 1977. Speech levels in various noise environments. Environmental health effects research series EPA-600/1-77-025.
23. Weiss, M. & Neuman, A.C. 1993. Noise reduction in hearing aids. In G.A. Studebaker & I. Hochberg (eds.) Acoustical factors affecting hearing aid performance. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 337-352.
24. Wittkop, T. 2001. Two-channel noise reduction algorithms motivated by models of binaural interaction. Doctoral thesis, University of Oldenburg.