On the number of auditory filter outputs needed to understand speech: Further evidence for auditory channel independence

Hearing Research

Volumn 255, Issue 1-2, 2009, Pages 99-108

  Apoux, Frédéric ^a   Healy, Eric W ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory channel independence; Glimpsing; Peripheral filtering; Speech recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PHONEME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; WORD RECOGNITION;

ADULT; AUDITORY PATHWAYS; HUMANS; NOISE; PHONETICS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651205238     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2009.06.005     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. ANSI S3.5-1969. Methods for Calculation of the Articulation Index (1969), American National Standards Institute, New York
2. ANSI S3.5-1997. Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index (1997), American National Standards Institute, New York
3. ANSI S3.6-2004. Specifications for Audiometers (2004), American National Standards Institute, New York
4. Apoux F., and Bacon S.P. Differential contribution of envelope fluctuations across frequency to consonant identification in quiet. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123 5 (2008) 2792-2800
5. Apoux F., and Bacon S.P. Selectivity of modulation interference for consonant identification in normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123 3 (2008) 1665-1672
6. Baskent D., and Shannon R.V. Frequency transposition around dead regions simulated with a noiseband vocoder. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 2 (2006) 1156-1163
7. Benkí J.J. Analysis of English nonsense syllable recognition in noise. Phonetica 60 (2003) 129-157
8. Bosman, A.J., 1989. Speech perception by the hearing impaired. Doctoral thesis. University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
9. Breeuwer M., and Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with frequency-selective sound-pressure information. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76 3 (1984) 686-691
10. Breeuwer M., and Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with formant-frequency information from voiced speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 77 1 (1985) 314-317
11. Breeuwer M., and Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with auditorily presented speech parameters. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 79 2 (1986) 481-499
12. Bronkhorst A.W., Bosman A.J., and Smoorenburg G.F. A model for context effects in speech recognition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93 1 (1993) 499-509
13. Brungart D.S., Chang P., Simpson B., and Wang D. Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120 6 (2006) 4007-4018
14. Buss E., Hall J.W., and Grose J.H. Spectral integration of synchronous and asynchronous cues to consonant identification. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115 5 (2003) 2278-2285
15. Celmer R.D., and Bienvenue G.R. Critical bands in the perception of speech signals by normal and sensorineural hearing loss listeners. In: Schouten M.E.H. (Ed). The Psychophysics of Speech Perception (1987), Nijhoff, Dordrecht 473-480
16. Cooke M.P. Glimpsing speech. J. Phonetics 31 57 (2003) 9-584
17. Cooke M.P. Making sense of everyday speech: a glimpsing account. In: Divenyi P. (Ed). Speech Separation by Humans and Machines (2005), Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht 305-314
18. Cooke M.P. A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 3 (2006) 1562-1573
19. Dorman M.F., Loizou P.C., and Rainey D. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102 4 (1997) 2403-2411
20. Drullman R. Speech intelligibility in noise: relative contribution of speech elements above and below the noise level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98 3 (1995) 1796-1798
21. Dubno J.R., Horwitz A.R., and Ahlstrom J.B. Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111 6 (2002) 2897-2907
22. Dudley H. Remaking speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 11 2 (1939) 169-177
23. Festen J.M., and Plomp R. Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88 4 (1990) 1725-1736
24. Fletcher H. Auditory patterns. Rev. Mod. Phys. 12 (1940) 47-65
25. French N.R., and Steinberg J.C. Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 19 1 (1947) 90-119
26. Friesen L.M., Shannon R.V., Baskent D., and Wang X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110 2 (2001) 1150-1163
27. Füllgrabe C., Berthommier F., and Lorenzi C. Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise. Hear. Res. 211 1-2 (2006) 74-84
28. Gilliom J.D., and Mills W.M. Information extraction from contralateral cues in the detection of signals of uncertain frequency. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 59 6 (1976) 1428-1433
29. Glasberg B.R., and Moore B.C.J. Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hear. Res. 47 1-2 (1990) 103-138
30. Grant K.W., and Braida L.D. Evaluating the articulation index for audiovisual input. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 89 6 (1991) 2952-2960
31. Green T.J., and McKeown J.D. Capture of attention in selective frequency listening. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 27 5 (2001) 1197-1210
32. Gustafsson H.A., and Arlinger S.D. Masking of speech by amplitude modulated noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95 1 (1994) 518-529
33. Healy, E.W., 1998. A minimum spectral contrast rule for speech recognition: intelligibility based upon contrasting pairs of narrow-band amplitude patterns. Doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
34. Healy E.W., and Warren R.M. The role of contrasting temporal amplitude patterns in the perception of speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113 3 (2003) 1676-1688
35. Hillenbrand J., Getty L.A., Clark M.J., and Wheeler K. Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97 5 (1995) 3099-3111
36. Howard-Jones P.A., and Rosen S. Uncomodulated glimpsing in 'checkerboard' noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93 5 (1993) 2915-2922
37. Hübner R., and Hafter E.R. Cuing mechanisms in auditory signal detection. Percept. Psychophys. 57 2 (1995) 197-202
38. Iyer N., Brungart D.S., and Simpson B.D. Effects of periodic masker interruption on the intelligibility of interrupted speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122 3 (2007) 1693-1701
39. Kalikow D.N., and Stevens K.N. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence material with controlled word predictability. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61 5 (1977) 1337-1351
40. Kennedy E., Levitt H., Neuman A.C., and Weiss M. Consonant-vowel intensity ratios for maximizing consonant recognition by hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103 2 (1998) 1098-1114
41. Kryter K.D. Validation of the articulation index. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34 11 (1962) 1698-1702
42. Li N., and Loizou P. Factors influencing intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech: implications for noise reduction. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123 3 (2008) 1673-1682
43. Lippman R.P. Accurate consonant perception without mid-frequency speech energy. IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 4 1 (1996) 66-69
44. Loizou P.C., Dorman M., and Tu Z. On the number of channels needed to understand speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106 4 (1999) 2097-2103
45. Miller G.A., and Licklider J.C.R. The intelligibility of interrupted speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 22 2 (1950) 167-173
46. Miller G.A., and Nicely P.E. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27 2 (1955) 338-352
47. Nelson P.B., Jin S.-H., Carney A.E., and Nelson D.A. Understanding speech in modulated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113 2 (2003) 961-968
48. Rhebergen K.S., Versfeld N.J., and Dreschler W.A. Release from informational masking by time reversal of native and non-native interfering speech (L). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118 3 (2005) 1274-1277
49. Shannon R.V., Jensvold A., Padilla M., Robert M.E., and Wang X. Consonant recordings for speech testing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106 6 (1999) L71-74
50. Shannon R.V., Zeng F., Kamath V., Wygonski J., and Ekelid M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 270 5234 (1995) 303-304
51. Scharf B., Reeves A., and Suciu J. The time required to focus on a cued signal frequency. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121 4 (2007) 2149-2157
52. Warren R.M., Bashford Jr. J.A., and Lenz P.W. Intelligibility of bandpass filtered speech: steepness of slopes required to eliminate transition band contributions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115 3 (2004) 1292-1295
53. Warren R.M., Hainsworth K.R., Brubaker B.S., Bashford J.A., and Healy E.W. Spectral restoration of speech: intelligibility is increased by inserting noise in spectral gaps. Percept. Psychophys. 59 2 (1997) 275-283
54. Warren R.M., Riener K.R., Bashford J.A., and Brubaker B.S. Spectral redundancy: intelligibility of sentences heard through narrow spectral slits. Percept. Psychophys. 57 2 (1995) 175-182
55. Xu L., Thompson C.S., and Pfingst B.E. Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117 5 (2005) 3255-3267
56. Zwicker E., and Schorn K. Psychoacoustical tuning curves in audiology. Audiology 17 4 (1978) 120-140