Classification and cue weighting of multidimensional stimuli with speech-like cues for young normal hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 725-745

  Wang, Xin ^a   Humes, Larry E ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FEMALE; GERIATRIC PATIENT; GROUPS BY AGE; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING; NOISE; SOUND; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STIMULUS; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TRAINING; WEIGHT; AGING; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEARING; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PRESBYACUSIS; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AGED; AGING; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HEARING; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PHONETICS; PRESBYCUSIS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 58149381084     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31817bdd42     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. American National Standards Institute. (1991). Maximum permissible ambient noise levels for audiometric test rooms. (ANSI S3.1-1991). New York: ANSI.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1996). Specifications for audiometers. (ANSI S3.6-1996). New York: ANSI.
3. Ballas, J. A. (1993). Common factors in the identification of an assortment of brief everyday sounds. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 19, 250-267.
4. Christensen, L. A., & Humes, L. E. (1997). Identification of multidimensional stimuli containing speech cues and the effects of training. J Acoust Soc Am, 102, 2297-2310. (Pubitemid 27441382)
5. Corso, J. F. (1963). Age and sex differences in pure tone thresholds: survey of hearing levels from 18 to 65 years. Arch Otolaryngol, 77, 385-405.
6. Cox, R. M., & McDaniel, D. M. (1986). Reference equivalent threshold levels for pure tones and 1/3-octave noise bands: insert earphone and TDH-49 earphone. J Acoust Soc Am, 79, 443-446.
7. Dorman, M. F., & Loizou, P C. (1996). Relative spectral change and formant transitions as cues to labial and alveolar place of articulation. J Acoust Soc Am, 100, 3825-3830.
8. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res, 12, 189-198.
9. Francis, A. L., Baldwin, K., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2000). Effects of training on attention to acoustic cues. Percept Psychophys, 62, 1668-1680.
10. Gelfand, S. A., Porrazzo, J., & Silman, S. (1988). Age effects on gap detection thresholds among normal and hearing impaired subjects. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 75.
11. Gianopoulos, I., & Stephens, D. (2005). General considerations about screening and their relevance to adult hearing screening. Audiol Med, 3, 165-174. (Pubitemid 41759379)
12. Gygi, B., Kidd, G. R., & Watson, C. S. (2004). Spectral-temporal factors in the identification of environmental sounds. J Acoust Soc Am, 115, 1252-1265. (Pubitemid 38298575)
13. Hedrick, M., & Younger, M. S. (2001). Perceptual weighting of relative amplitude and formant transition cues in aided CV syllables. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 44, 964-974. (Pubitemid 34014158)
14. Hedrick, M., & Younger, M. S. (2007). Perceptual weighting of stop consonant cues by normal and impaired listeners in reverberation versus noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 50, 254-269. (Pubitemid 350058600)
15. Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2006). Cue weight in auditory categorization: Implication for first and second language acquisition. J Acoust Soc Am, 119, 3059-3071.
16. Humes, L. E. (1991). Prescribing gain characteristics of linear hearing aids. In G.A. Studebaker, F.H. Bess & L. Beck (Eds.), The second vanderbilt/va hearing aid report. Parkton, Maryland: York Press.
17. Klatt, D. H., & Klatt, L. C. (1990). Analysis synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. J Acoust Soc Am, 87, 820-857.
18. Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1989). Multidimensional scaling. Newbury Park: Sage.
19. Liberman, A. M., Delattre, P. C., & Cooper, F. S, et al. (1954). The role of consonant-vowel transitions in the perception of the stop and nasal consonants. Psychol Monogr, 68(8), 1-13.
20. Lindholm, J. M., Dorman, M., & Taylor, B. E., et al (1988). Stimulus factors influencing the identification of voiced stop consonants by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired adults. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 1608-1614. (Pubitemid 18126400)
21. Lisker, L. (1986). Voicing in English: a catalogue of acoustic features signaling /b/ versus /p/ in trochees. Lang Speech, 29, 3-11.
22. Moscicki, E., Elkins, E., & Baum, H., et al. (1985). Hearing loss in the elderly: an epidemiologic study of the Framingham heart study cohort. Ear Hear, 6, 184-190. (Pubitemid 15044292)
23. Nearey, T. M. (1989). Static, dynamic and relational properties in vowel perception. J Acoust Soc Am, 85, 2088-2113. (Pubitemid 19131587)
24. Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification categorization relationship. J Exp Psychol, 115, 39-57.
25. Raphael, L. J. (2005). Acoustic cues to the perception of segmental phonemes. In Pisoni, D.B. & Remez, R. E., (Eds.), The handbook of speech perception (pp. 182-206). Oxford: Blackwell.
26. Repp, B. H. (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: new experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychol Bull, 92, 81-110.
27. Sommers, M. S. (2005). Age-related changes in spoken word recognition, the handbook of speech perception, (pp. 469-493). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
28. Spoor, A. (1967). Presbycusis values in relation to noise-induced hearing loss. Int Audiol, 6, 48-57.
29. Stevens, K. N., & Blumstein, S. E. (1978). Invariant cues for place of articulation in stop consonants. J Acoust Soc Am, 64, 1358-1368.
30. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A rationalized arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 28, 455-462.
31. Whalen, D. H. (1991). Perception of the English /s/-/∫/ distinction relies on ricative noises and transitions, not on brief spectral slices. J Acoust Soc Am, 90, 1776-1785.
32. Wiley, T. L., Cruickshanks, K. J., & Nondahl, D. M., et al. (1998). Aging and high-frequency hearing sensitivity. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41, 1061-1072.
33. Wright, R. (2004). A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In B. Hayes, R. Kirchner, & D. Steriade (Eds.), Phonetically based phonology. (pp. 34-57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.