The Effects of Digital Noise Reduction on the Acceptance of Background Noise

Trends in Amplification

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 83-93

  Mueller, H Gustav ^a   Weber, Jennifer ^a   Hornsby, Benjamin W Y ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

acceptable noise level (ANL); background noise; digital noise reduction (DNR); hearing aids

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPRESSION; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE REDUCTION; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ENVIRONMENT; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 33747458497     PISSN: 10847138     EISSN: 19405588     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1084713806289553     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Kirkwood DH. Dispensers surveyed on what leads to patient satisfaction. Hear J. 2005;58: 19–29.
2. Mueller HG Ricketts TA. Digital noise reduction. Hear J. 2005;58: 10–17.
3. Bentler RA. Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 473–484.
4. Bentler RA Chiou L-K. Digital noise reduction: an overview. Trends Amplif. 2006;10: 67–82.
5. Anzalone M Doherty K Carney L. Potential benefits to intelligibility of time-frequency gain manipulation. Poster presented at: the American Auditory Society Annual Meeting; March 5–7, 2005; Scottsdale, Ariz.
6. Boymans M Dreschler WA. Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Audiology. 2000;39: 260–268.
7. Walden B Surr R Cord M Edwards B Olson L. Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000;11: 540–560.
8. Alcantara JI Moore BC Kuhnel V Launer S. Evaluation of the noise reduction system in a commercial digital hearing aid. Int J Audiol. 2003;42: 34–42.
9. Ricketts T Hornsby B. Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing digital noise reduction. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 270–277.
10. Cox R Alexander G. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear. 1995;16: 176–186.
11. Nabelek AK Tuckler FM Letowski TR. Toleration of background noises: relationships with patterns of hearing aid user by elderly persons. J Speech Hear Res. 1991;34: 679–685.
12. Nabelek AK. Acceptance of background noise may be key to successful fittings. Hear J. 2005;58: 10–15.
13. Freyaldenhoven MC Nabelek AK Burchfield SB Thelin JW. Acceptable noise level as a measure of directional hearing aid benefit. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 228–236.
14. Nabelek AK Tampas JW Burchfield SB. Comparison of speech perception in background noise with acceptance of background noise in aided and unaided conditions. J Speech Hear Res. 2004;47: 1001–1011.
15. Rogers DS Harkrider AW Burchfield S Nabelek A. The influence of listener's gender on the acceptance of background noise. J Am Acad Audiol. 2003;14: 372–382.
16. Nabelek AK Freyaldenhoven M Tampas J Burchfield S Muenchen R. Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use. J Am Acad Audiol. In press.
17. Powers TA Holube I Wesselkamp M. The use of digital features to combat background noise. In: Kochkin S Strom KE eds. High performance hearing solutions. Hear Rev. 1999;3: 36–39.
18. Vaseghi SV. Advanced Signal Processing and Noise Reduction. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley; 2000.
19. Dillon H. NAL-NL-1: a new prescriptive fitting procedure for nonlinear hearing aids. Hear J. 1999;52: 10–16.
20. Nilsson M Soli SD Sullivan J. Development of a hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception threshold in quiet and noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95: 1085–1099.
21. Harkrider AW Smith SB. Acceptable noise level, phoneme recognition in noise, and measures of auditory efferent activity. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 530–545.