Effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to bilateral speech understanding

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 543-555

  Hornsby, Benjamin W Y ^a   Johnson, Earl E ^b   Picou, Erin ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEARING; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PITCH PERCEPTION; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80052443005     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31820e5028     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Amos, N. E., & Humes, L. E. (2007). Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 50, 819-834. (Pubitemid 350058562)
2. ANSI (1996). ANSI S3.6 American National Standard Specification for Audiometers. New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
3. ANSI (1997). ANSI S3.5 American National Standard Methods for the Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index. New York, NY: American National Standards Institute
4. 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. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 1133-1144. (Pubitemid 35006669)
5. Boothroyd, A. (1967). The discrimination by partially hearing children of frequency distorted speech. Int J Audiol, 6, 136-145.
6. Boothroyd, A. (1978). Speech Perception and Sensorineural Hearing Loss. In M. Ross & T. Giolas (Eds). Auditory Management of Hearing- Impaired Children (pp. 117-143). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
7. Cairns, S., Frith, R., Munro, K., et al. (2007). Repeatability of the TEN(HL) test for detecting cochlear dead regions. Int J Audiol, 46, 575-584. (Pubitemid 47537326)
8. Ching, T. Y., Dillon, H., Byrne, D. (1998). Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. J Acoust Soc Am, 103, 1128-1140. (Pubitemid 28087582)
9. Ching, T. Y., Dillon, H., Katsch, R., et al. (2001). Maximizing effective audibility in hearing aid fitting. Ear Hear, 22, 212-224. (Pubitemid 32531963)
10. Cornelisse, L. E., Seewald, R. C., Jamieson, D. G. (1995). The input/output formula: A theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 1854-1864.
11. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Gilmore, C. (1987). Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST). Ear Hear, 8, 119S-126S.
12. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Gilmore, C., et al. (1988). Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear, 9, 198-207.
13. Dubno, J. R., Horwitz, A., Ahlstrom, J. (2005a). Word recognition in noise at higher-than-normal levels: Decreases in scores and increases in masking. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 914-922. (Pubitemid 41129226)
14. Dubno, J., Horwitz, A., Ahlstrom, J. (2005b). Recognition of filtered words in noise at higher-than-normal levels: Decreases in scores with and without increases in masking. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 923-933. (Pubitemid 41129227)
15. Dubno, J. R., & Schaefer, A. B. (1992). Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 2110-2121.
16. Eggermont, J. J. (2008). The role of sound in adult and developmental auditory cortical plasticity. Ear Hear, 29, 819-829.
17. Fabry, D. A., & Van Tasell, D. J. (1986). Masked and filtered simulation of hearing loss: Effects on consonant recognition. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 29, 170-178. (Pubitemid 16068579)
18. Hogan, C. A., & Turner, C. W. (1998). High-frequency audibility: Benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 432-441. (Pubitemid 28321731)
19. Hornsby, B. W. Y., & Dundas, J. A. (2009). Factors affecting outcomes on the TEN (SPL) test in adults with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol, 20, 252-263.
20. 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. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 1706-1717. (Pubitemid 36297971)
21. Hornsby, B. W. Y., & Ricketts, T. A. (2006). The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. II. Sloping hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am, 119, 1752-1763. (Pubitemid 43326041)
22. Hornsby, B. W. Y., Trine, T., Ohde, R. (2006). The effects of high presentation levels on consonant feature transmission. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 1719-1729.
23. Horwitz, A. R., Ahlstrom, J. B., Dubno, J. R. (2008). Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 51, 798-813. (Pubitemid 351962125)
24. Humes, L. E. (2002). Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 1112-1132. (Pubitemid 35006668)
25. Humes, L. E. (2007). The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 590-603. (Pubitemid 351175761)
26. Humes, L. E., & Roberts, L. (1990). Speech recognition difficulties of the hearing-impaired elderly: The contributions of audibility. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 33, 726-735.
27. Moore, B. C. J. (2004). Dead regions in the cochlea: Conceptual foundations, diagnosis, and clinical applications. Ear Hear, 25, 98-116. (Pubitemid 38451759)
28. Moore, B. C. J., Fullgrabe, C., Stone, M. A. Effect of spatial separation, extended bandwidth, and compression speed on intelligibility in a competing-speech task. J Acoust Soc Am, 128, 360-371.
29. Moore, B. C. J., Huss, M., Vickers, D. A., et al. (2000). A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol, 34, 205-224.
30. Moore, B. C. J., Killen, T., Munro, K. (2003). Application of the TEN test to hearing-impaired teenagers with severe-to-profound hearing loss. Int J Audiol, 42, 465-74. (Pubitemid 37474135)
31. Moore, B. C. J., & Vinay, S. N. (2009). Enhanced discrimination of low-frequency sounds for subjects with high-frequency dead regions. Brain, 132(Pt 2), 524-536.
32. Pavlovic, C. V. (1984). Use of the articulation index for assessing residual auditory function in listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment. J Acoust Soc Am, 75, 1253-1258. (Pubitemid 14139206)
33. Pavlovic, C. V. (1987). Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. J Acoust Soc Am, 82, 413-422.
34. Pfeiffer, E. (1975). A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc, 23, 433-441.
35. Rankovic, C. M. (1991). An application of the articulation index to hearing aid fitting. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 34, 391-402.
36. Sherbecoe, R. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (2002). Audibility-index functions for the Connected Speech Test. Ear Hear, 23, 385-398. (Pubitemid 35244756)
37. Sherbecoe, R. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (2003). Audibility-index predictions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the Connected Speech Test. Ear Hear, 24, 71-88.
38. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 28, 455-462.
39. Studebaker, G., Sherbecoe, R., McDaniel, D., et al. (1999). Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. J Acoust Soc Am, 105, 2431-2444. (Pubitemid 29174330)
40. Thai-Van, H., Micheyl, C., Norena, A., et al. (2007). Enhanced frequency discrimination in hearing-impaired individuals: A review of perceptual correlates of central neural plasticity induced by cochlear damage. Hear Res, 233, 14-22. (Pubitemid 47520649)
41. Turner, C. W., & Cummings, K. J. (1999). Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. Am J Audiol, 8, 47-56.
42. Turner, C. W., & Henry, B. A. (2002). Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 1675-1680.
43. Vestergaard, M. D. (2003). Dead regions in the cochlea: Implications for speech recognition and applicability of articulation index theory. Int J Audiol, 42, 249-261. (Pubitemid 37372664)
44. 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. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 1164-1175. (Pubitemid 32734749)
45. Vinay & Moore, B. C. J. (2007a). Prevalence of dead regions in subjects with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear, 28, 231-241. (Pubitemid 46673499)
46. Vinay & Moore, B. C. J. (2007b). Speech recognition as a function of high-pass filter cutoff frequency for people with and without lowfrequency cochlear dead regions. J Acoust Soc Am, 122, 542-553. (Pubitemid 47365965)
47. Zurek, P. M., & Delhorne, L. A. (1987). Consonant reception in noise by listeners with mild and moderate sensorineural hearing impairment. J Acoust Soc Am, 82, 1548-1559.