Learning speech-in-noise discrimination in adult humans

Hearing Research

Volumn 238, Issue 1-2, 2008, Pages 155-164

  Cainer, Kathryn E ^a   James, C ^a   Rajan, R ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Learning; Noise type; Speech; Speech in noise discrimination

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; NOISE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AUDITORY PATHWAYS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SEX FACTORS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 40749138147     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2007.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Amitay S., Irwin A., Hawkey D.J.C., Cowan J.A., and Moore D.R. Comparison of adaptive procedures for rapid and reliable threshold assessment and training in naïve listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 (2006) 1616-1625
2. Atienza M., Cantero J.L., and Dominguez-Marin E. The time course of neural changes underlying auditory perceptual learning. Learn. Memory 9 (2002) 138-150
3. Barrenäs M.L., and Wikström I. The influence of hearing and age on speech recognition scores in noise in audiological patients and in the general population. Ear Hear. 21 (2000) 569-577
4. Bench J., Kowal A., and Bamford J. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Brit. J. Audiol. 13 (1979) 108-112
5. Bentler R.A. List equivalency and test-retest reliability of the speech in noise test. Am. J. Audiol. 9 (2000) 84-100
6. Bergeson T.R., Schneider B.A., and Hamstra S.J. Duration discrimination in younger and older adults. Can. Acoust. 29 (2001) 3-9
7. Bergman M. Hearing and aging. Audiology 10 (1971) 164-171
8. Bronkhorst A.W. The Cocktail party phenomenon: a review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Acustica 86 (2000) 117-128
9. Brungart D.S. Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109 (2001) 1101-1109
10. Brungart D.S., Simpson B.D., Ericson M.A., and Scott K.R. Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110 (2001) 2527-2538
11. Braun C., Heinz U., Schweizer R., Wiech K., Birbaumer N., and Topka H. Dynamic organization organization of the somatosensory cortex induced by motor activity. Brain 124 (2001) 2259-2267
12. CHABA (Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics, and Biomechanics). Speech understanding and aging. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83 (1988) 859-895
13. Dubno J.R., Dirks D.D., and Morgan D.E. Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76 (1984) 87-96
14. Dubno J.R., Lee F.S., Matthews L.J., and Mills J.H. Age-related and gender-related changes in monaural speech recognition. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 40 (1997) 444-452
15. Duquesnoy A.J. Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74 (1983) 739-743
16. Duquesnoy A.J. The intelligibility of sentences in quiet and noise in aged listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74 (1983) 1136-1144
17. Duquesnoy A.J., and Plomp R. Effect of reverberation and noise on the intelligibility of sentences in cases of presbycusis. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68 (1980) 537-544
18. Eisner F., and McQueen J.M. The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Percept. Psychophys. 67 (2005) 224-238
19. Fenn K.M., Nusbaum H.C., and Margoliash D. Consolidation during sleep of perceptual learning of spoken language. Nature 425 (2003) 614-616
20. Foster J.R., and Haggard M.P. The four alternative auditory feature test FAAF.-linguistic and psychometric properties of the material with normative data in noise. Brit. J. Audiol. 21 (1987) 165-174
21. Frisina D.R., and Frisina R.D. Speech recognition in noise and presbycusis: relations to possible neural mechanisms. Hear. Res. 106 (1997) 95-104
22. Gelfund S.A., Ross L., and Miller S. Sentence reception in noise from one versus two sources: effects of aging and hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83 (1988) 248-256
23. Gick M.I., Craik E.I.M., and Morris R.G. Task complexity and age differences in working memory. Mere. Cog. 16 (1988) 353-361
24. Goldinger S.D. Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 22 (1996) 1166-1183
25. Goldstone R.L. Perceptual learning. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 49 (1998) 585-612
26. Gordon-Salant S., and Fitzgibbons P.J. Temporal factors and speech recognition performance in young and elderly listeners. J. Speech Hear. Res. 36 (1993) 1276-1285
27. Greenspan S.L., Nusbaum H.C., and Pisoni D.B. Perceptual learning of synthetic speech produced by rule. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 14 (1988) 421-433
28. Grose J.H., Hall III J.W., and Buss E. Gap duration in listeners with cochlear hearing loss: effects of gap and marker duration, frequency separation, and mode of presentation. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2 (2001) 388-398
29. Hagerman B. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand. Audiol. 112 (1982) 79-87
30. Hall J.W., Grose J.H., and Mendoza L. Spectro-temporal processing in cochlear hearing-impaired listeners. In: Axelsson A., Borchgrevink H., Hamernik R., Hellstrom P.-A., Henderson D., and Salvi R.J. (Eds). Scientific Basis of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (1995), Thieme Medical Press, New York 243-251
31. Heinrich A., and Schneider B. Age-related changes in within- and between-channel gap detection using sinusoidal stimuli. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 (2006) 2316-2326
32. Humes L.E. Speech understanding in the elderly. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 7 (1996) 161-167
33. Hyde J.M., and Linn M.C. Gender differences in verbal ability: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 104 (1988) 53-69
34. International Organization for Standardization, 1989. Acoustics-Audiometric test methods. Part 1: basic pure tone air and bone conduction threshold audiometry. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, International Standard ISO 8253-1989.
35. Kalikow D.N., and Stevens K.N. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61 (1977) 1337-1351
36. Kraljic T., and Samuel A.G. Perceptual learning for speech: is there a return to normal?. Cog. Psychol. 51 (2005) 141-178
37. Kraljic T., and Samuel A.G. Generalization in perceptual learning for speech. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 13 (2006) 262-268
38. Killion M.C., Niquette P.A., and Gudmundsen G.I. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116 (2004) 2395-2405
39. Kraus N., McGee T.J., and Koch D.B. Speech sound representation, perception, and plasticity: a neurophysiologic perceptive. Audiol. Neuro-Otol. 3 2-3 (1998) 168-182
40. Leshowitz, B., 1977. Speech intelligibility in noise for listeners with sensori-neural hearing damage. IPO Annual Progress Report No. 12. Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
41. Levitt H. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49 (1971) 467-477
42. Lewis H.D., Benignus V.A., Muller K.E., Malott C.M., and Barton C.N. Babble and random-noise masking of speech in high and low context cue conditions. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 31 (1988) 108-114
43. Lister J., Besing J., and Koehnke J. Effects of age and frequency disparity on gap discrimination. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111 (2002) 2793-2800
44. Lister J., Koehnke J., and Besing J. Binaural gap duration discrimination in listeners with impaired hearing and normal hearing. Ear Hear. 21 (2000) 141-150
45. Lister J., and Tarver K. Effect of age on silent gap discrimination in synthetic speech stimuli. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 47 (2004) 257-268
46. Lutfi R.A. How much masking is informational masking?. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88 (1990) 2607-2610
47. Lyregaard P. Theory of speech audiometry tests. In: Martin R. (Ed). Speech Audiometry (1997), Whurr Publishers, England
48. Martin J.S., and Jerger J.F. Some effects of aging on central auditory processing. J. Rehab. Res. Dev. 42 (2005) 25-44
49. Nilsson M., Soli S.D., and Sullivan J.A. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95 (1994) 1085-1099
50. Nittrouer S., and Boothroyd A. Context effects in phoneme and word recognition by young children and older adults. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87 (1990) 2705-2715
51. Norris D., McQueen J.M., and Cutler A. Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychol. 47 (2003) 204-238
52. Nygaard L.C., and Pisoni D.B. Talker-specific learning in speech perception. Percept. Psychophys. 60 (1998) 355-376
53. Pichora-Fuller M.K. Processing speed and timing in aging adults: psychoacoustics, speech perception, and comprehension. Int. J. Audiol. 42 (2003) S59-S67
54. Pichora-Fuller M.K., Schneider B.A., and Daneman M. How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97 (1995) 593-608
55. Pichora-Fuller K., Schneider B.A., Benson N., Hamstra S., and Storzer E. Effect of age on detection of gaps in speech and non-speech markers varying in duration and spectral symmetry. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 (2006) 1143-1155
56. Plant G. Testing visual and auditory-visual speech perception. In: Martin R. (Ed). Speech Audiometry (1997), Whurr Publishers, England
57. Plomp R., and Mimpen AM. Speech-reception threshold for sentences as a function of age and noise level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 66 (1979) 1333-1342
58. Rhebergen K.S., and Versfeld N.J. A speech intelligibility index-based approach to predict the speech reception threshold for sentences in fluctuating noise for normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117 (2005) 2181-2192
59. Roberts R.A., and Lister J.L. Effects of age and hearing loss on gap detection and the precedence effect: broadband stimuli. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 47 (2004) 965-978
60. Robinson K., and Summerfield A.Q. Adult auditory learning and training. Ear Hear. 17 Suppl 3 (1996) 51S-65S
61. Schneider B.A., Speranza F., and Pichora-Fuller M.K. Age-related changes in temporal resolution: envelope and intensity effects. Can. J. Exp. Psychol. 52 (1998) 184-190
62. Snell K.B., and Frisina D.R. Relationships among age-related differences in gap detection and word recognition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107 (2000) 1615-1626
63. Snell K.B., Mapes F.M., Hickman E.D., and Frisina D.R. Word recognition in competing babble and the effects of age, temporal processing, and absolute sensitivity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112 (2002) 720-727
64. Sommers M.S. Speech perception in older adults: the importance of speech-specific cognitive abilities. J. Am. Geriatric Soc. 45 (1997) 633-637
65. Tremblay K., Kraus N., and McGee T. The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiological changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport 9 (1998) 3557-3560
66. van Rooij J.C., and Plomp R. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II: Multivariate analyses. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88 (1990) 2611-2624
67. van Rooij J.C.O.M., PIomp R., and Ofiebeke J.F. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. 1: development of test battery. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 86 (1989) 1294-1309
68. van Wijngaarden S.J., Steeneken H.J., and Houtgast T. Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111 (2002) 1906-1916
69. Watson C.S. Time course of auditory perceptual learning. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 89 Suppl (1980) 96-102
70. Wingfield A. Cognitive factors in auditory performance: context, speed of processing, and constraints of memory. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 7 (1996) 175-182