Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 819-834

  Amos, Nathan E ^a   Humes, Larry E ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

High frequencies; Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL); Speech understanding

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PHONEME; SCORING SYSTEM; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; ADOLESCENT; AUDITORY STIMULATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEARING; HEARING LOSS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, HIGH-FREQUENCY; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PITCH PERCEPTION; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 34548567719     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/057)     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. American National Standards Institute. (1969). American national standard methods for the calculation of the articulation index (ANSI S3.5-1969). New York: Author.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1987). Criteria for permissible ambient noise during audiometric testing (ANSI S3.1-1987). New York: Author.
3. American National Standards Institute. (1989). Specifications for audiometers (ANSI S3.6-1989). New York: Author.
4. American National Standards Institute. (1997). Revision of ANSI S3.5-1969 (R 1986), American national standard methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index (ANSI S3.5-1997). New York: Author.
5. Amos, N. E., & Humes, L. E. (2001). The contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in sensorineural hearing loss. In A. J. M. Houtsma, A. Kohlrausch, V. F. Prijs, & R. Schoonhoven (Eds.), Physiological and psychological bases of auditory function: Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Hearing (pp. 378-385). Maastricht, the Netherlands: Shaker Publishing B.V.
6. Baer, T., Moore, B. C. J., & Kluk, K. (2002). Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 1133-1144.
7. Boothroyd, A. (1995). Speech perception tests and hearing-impaired children. In G. Plant & K. E. Spens (Eds.), Profound deafness and speech communication (pp. 345-371). London: Whurr Publishers.
8. Boothroyd, A. (1999). Computer-assisted speech perception assessment (CASPA 2.2) [Computer software]. San Diego, CA: Arthur Boothroyd.
9. Bredberg, G. (1968). Cellular pattern and nerve supply of the human organ of Corti. Acta Otolaryngologica, Suppl. 236, 1-135.
10. Byrne, D., & Dillon, D. (1986). The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear and Hearing, 7, 257-265.
11. 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. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103, 1128-1140.
12. Cox, R. M. (1985). A structured approach to hearing aid selection. Ear and Hearing, 6, 226-239.
13. Divenyi, P. L., & Haupt, K. M. (1997a). Audiological correlates of speech understanding under non-optimal conditions in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and laterality effects. Ear and Hearing, 18, 42-61.
14. Divenyi, P. L., & Haupt, K. M. (1997b). Audiological correlates of speech understanding under non-optimal conditions in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. II. Correlational analysis. Ear and Hearing, 18, 100-113.
15. Divenyi, P. L., & Haupt, K. M. (1997c). Audiological correlates of speech understanding under non-optimal conditions in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. III. Factor representation. Ear and Hearing, 18, 189-201.
16. Durlach, N. I., & Colburn, H. S. (1978). Binaural phenomena. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.), Handbook of perception (Vol. 4, pp. 365-466). New York: Academic Press.
17. Durlach, N. I., Thompson, C. L., & Colburn, H. S. (1981). Binaural interaction in impaired listeners. Audiology, 20, 181-211.
18. Era, P., Jukka, J., Qvarnberg, Y., & Heikkinen, E. (1986). Pure tone thresholds, speech understanding, and their correlates in samples of men of different ages. Audiology, 25, 338-352.
19. Fletcher, H., & Galt, R. H. (1950). The perception of speech sounds and its relation to telephony. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 89-151.
20. French, N. R., & Steinberg, J. C. (1947). Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 19, 90-119.
21. Gordon-Salant, S., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (1993). Temporal factors and speech recognition performance in young and elderly listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1276-1285.
22. Gordon-Salant, S., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (1997). Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 423-431.
23. Goshorn, E. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (1994). Effects of intensity on speech recognition in high- and low-frequency bands. Ear and Hearing, 15, 454-460.
24. Helfer, K. S. (1992). Aging and the binaural advantage in reverberation and noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 1394-1401.
25. Helfer, K. S., & Wilber, L. A. (1990). Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 149-155.
26. Hogan, C. A., & Turner, C. W. (1998). High-frequency audibility: Benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 432-441.
27. Hornsby, B. W. Y., & Ricketts, T. A. (2003). The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1706-1717.
28. Horwitz, A. R., Turner, C. W., & Fabry, D. A. (1991). Effects of different frequency response strategies upon recognition and preference for audible speech stimuli. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 1185-1196.
29. Houtgast, T., & Steeneken, H. J. M. (1985). A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, 1069-1077.
30. Humes, L. E. (1986). Evaluation of several rationales for selecting hearing aid gain. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51, 272-281.
31. Humes, L. E. (2002). Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 1112-1132.
32. Humes, L. E., & Christopherson, L. (1991). Speech identification difficulties of hearing-impaired elderly persons: The contributions of auditory processing deficits. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 686-693.
33. Humes, L. E., Coughlin, M., & Talley, L. (1996a). Evaluation of the use of a new compact disc for auditory perceptual assessment in the elderly. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 7, 419-427.
34. 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.
35. Humes, L. E., & Hackett, T. (1990). Comparison of frequency response and aided speech-recognition performance for hearing aids selected by three different prescriptive methods. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 1, 101-108.
36. Humes, L. E., & Roberts, L. (1990). Speech-recognition difficulties of hearing-impaired elderly: The contributions of audibility. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 726-735.
37. Humes, L. E., Watson, B. U., Christensen, L. A., Cokely, C. G., Halling, D. C., & Lee, L. (1994). Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 465-474.
38. Jerger, J., & Chmiel, R. (1997). Factor analytic structure of auditory impairment in elderly persons. The Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 8, 269-276.
39. Jerger, J., Jerger, S., & Pirozzolo, F. (1991). Correlational analysis of speech audiometric scores, hearing loss, age and cognitive abilities in the elderly. Ear and Hearing, 12, 103-109.
40. Kuk, F. K., & Ludvigsen, C. L. (1999). Variables affecting the use of prescriptive formulae to fit modern nonlinear hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 458-465.
41. Liberman, M. C., & Dodds, L. W. (1984). Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology. III. Stereocilia damage and alterations of threshold tuning curves. Hearing Research, 16, 55-74.
42. Middlebrooks, J. C., & Green, D. M. (1991). Sound localization by human listeners. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 135-159.
43. Moore, B. C. J. (1996). Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. Ear and Hearing, 17, 133-161.
44. Moore, B. C. J. (2001). Dead regions in the cochlea: Diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing aids. Trends in Amplification, 5, 1-34.
45. Moore, B. C. J., & Glasberg, B. R. (1997). A model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Auditory Neuroscience, 3, 289-311.
46. Moore, B. C. J., Huss, M., Vickers, D. A., Glasberg, B. R., & Alcantara, J. I. (2000). A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. British Journal of Audiology, 34, 205-224.
47. Noble, W., Byrne, D., & Lepage, B. (1994). Effects on sound localization of configuration and type of hearing impairment. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 992-1005.
48. Pascoe, D. P. (1975). Frequency responses of hearing aids and their effects on the speech perception of hearing-impaired subjects. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, 84(Suppl. 23), 5-40.
49. Pavlovic, C. V., Studebaker, G. A., & Sherbecoe, R. L. (1986). An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing impaired individuals. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 50-57.
50. Pearsons, K. S., Bennett, R. L., & Fidell, S. (1977). Speech levels in various noise environments (EPA Report No. 600/177-025). Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.
51. Rankovic, C. M. (2002). Articulation index predictions for hearing-impaired listeners with and without cochlear dead regions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111, 2545-2548.
52. Schwartz, D. M., Surr, R. K., Montgomery, A. A., Prosek, R. A., & Walden, B. E. (1979). Performance of high frequency impaired listeners with conventional and extended high frequency amplification. Audiology, 18, 157-174.
53. Seewald, R. (1992). The desired sensation level method for fitting children: Version 3.0. Hearing Journal, 45, 36-41.
54. Skinner, M. W. (1980). Speech intelligibility in noise-induced hearing loss: Effects of high-frequency compensation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 306-317.
55. Skinner, M. W., Karstaedt, M. M., & Miller, J. D. (1982). Amplification bandwidth and speech intelligibility for two listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology, 21, 251-268.
56. Skinner, M. W., & Miller, J. D. (1983). Amplification bandwidth and intelligibility of speech in quiet and noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology, 22, 253-279.
57. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455-462.
58. Studebaker, G. A., Sherbecoe, R. L., McDaniel, D. M., & Gwaltney, C. A. (1999). Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105, 2431-2444.
59. Sullivan, J. A., Allsman, C. S., Nielsen, L. B., & Mobley, J. P. (1992). Amplification for listeners with steeply sloping, high-frequency hearing loss. Ear and Hearing, 13, 35-45.
60. Summers, V. (2004). Do tests of cochlear dead regions provide important information for fitting hearing aids? The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 1420-1423.
61. Triantos, T. J., & McCandless, G. A. (1974). High frequency distortion. Hearing Aid Journal, 27, 9.
62. Turner, C. W., & Cummings, K. J. (1999). Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. American Journal of Audiology, 8, 47-56.
63. Turner, C. W., & Henry, B. A. (2002). Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 1675-1680.
64. Van Buuren, R. A., Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1995). Evaluation of a wide range of amplitude-frequency responses for the hearing impaired. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 211-221.
65. van Rooij, J. C. G. M., & Plomp, R. (1990). Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II. Multivariate analyses. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 2611-2624.
66. van Rooij, J. C. G. M., & Plomp, R. (1992). Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. III. Additional data and final discussion. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91, 1028-1033.
67. van Rooij, J. C. G. M., Plomp, R., & Orlebeke, J. F. (1989). Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. I. Development of test battery. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 86, 1294-1309.
68. Van Tasell, D. J. (1993). Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 228-244.
69. Vickers, D. A., Moore, B. C. J., & Baer, T. (2001). Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1164-1175.
70. Willott, J. F. (1991). Aging and the auditory system. San Diego, CA: Singular.