Gender identification in younger and older adults: Use of spectral and temporal cues in noise-vocoded speech

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 411-420

  Schvartz, Kara C ^a   Chatterjee, Monita ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY CORTEX; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PRESBYACUSIS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME PERCEPTION; VOICE;

ADULT; AGED; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY CORTEX; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PITCH PERCEPTION; PRESBYCUSIS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME PERCEPTION; VOICE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84860833886     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31823d78dc     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. ANSI. (2004). American National Standard Specification for Audiometers (ANSI S3.6-2004). New York: American National Standards Institute.
2. Arehart, K. H., King, C. A., McLean-Mudgett, K. S. (1997). Role of fundamental frequency differences in the perceptual separation of competing vowel sounds by listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Hear Lang Res, 40, 1434-1444. (Pubitemid 28008837)
3. Boersma, P. (1993). Accurate short-term analysis of the fundamental frequency and the harmonic-to-noise ratio of a sampled sound. Proc Inst Phonetic Sci, Amsterdam, 17, 97-110.
4. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2008). Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer (version 5.0.34) [Computer Program]. Retrieved October 1, 2008 from http://www.praat.org.
5. Brungart, D. S. (2001). Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. J Acoust Soc Am, 109, 1101-1109. (Pubitemid 32215916)
6. Chatelin, V., Kim, E. J., Driscoll, C., et al. (2004). Cochlear implant outcomes in the elderly. Otol Neurotol, 25, 298-301. (Pubitemid 39079812)
7. Chatterjee, M., & Peng, S. C. (2008) Processing F0 with cochlear implants: Modulation frequency discrimination and speech intonation recognition. Hear Res, 235, 143-156. (Pubitemid 50019115)
8. Childers, D. G., & Wu, K. (1991). Gender recognition from speech. Part II: Fine analysis. J Acoust Soc Am, 90, 1841-1856.
9. Dorman, M. F., Loizou, P. C., Rainey, D. (1997). Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sinewave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am, 102, 2403-2411. (Pubitemid 27441393)
10. Friesen, L. M., Shannon, R. V., Baskent, D., et al. (2001). Speech recognition in noise as the number of spectral channels: Comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 1150-1163. (Pubitemid 32734748)
11. Fu, Q.-J., Chinchilla, S., Galvin, J. J. (2004). The role of spectral and temporal cues in voice gender discrimination by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. J Assoc Rs Otolaryngol, 5, 253-260. (Pubitemid 39332096)
12. Fu, Q.-J., Chinchilla, S., Nogaki, G., et al. (2005). Voice gender identification by cochlear implant users: The role of spectral and temporal resolution. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 1711-1718. (Pubitemid 41318598)
13. Fu, Q.-J. (2008). TigerSpeech Technology: Computer Assisted Speech Training (version 5.04.02) [Computer Program]. Retrieved May 2008 from www.tigerspeech.com
14. Goldstein, J. L. (1973). An optimum processor theory for the central formation of the pitch of complex tones. J Acoust Soc Am, 54, 1496-1516.
15. Gonzalez, J., & Oliver, J. C. (2005). Gender and speaker identification as a function of the number of channels in spectrally reduced speech. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 461-470. (Pubitemid 40981500)
16. Greenwood, D. D. (1990). A cochlear frequency-position function for several species-29 years later. J Acoust Soc Am, 87, 2592-2605. (Pubitemid 20289735)
17. Grose, J. H., Mamo, S. K., Hall, J. W. (2009). Age effects in temporal envelope processing: Speech unmasking and auditory steady state responses. Ear Hear, 30, 568-575.
18. Henry, B. A., & Turner, C. W. (2003). The resolution of complex spectral patterns by cochlear implant and normal hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 2861-2873. (Pubitemid 36547360)
19. Henry, B. A., Turner, C. W., Behrens, A. (2005). Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: Normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 1111-1121. (Pubitemid 41129243)
20. Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., et al. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American Englishvowels. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 3099-3111.
21. 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. (Pubitemid 20129722)
22. Kovacic, D., & Balaban, E. (2009). Voice gender perception by cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am, 126, 762-775.
23. Leigh-Paffenroth, E. D., & Fowler, C. G. (2006). Amplitude-modulated auditory steadystate responses in younger and older listeners. J Am Acad Aud, 17, 582-597. (Pubitemid 44515371)
24. Licklider, J. C. R. (1951). A duplex theory of pitch perception (reproduced in Schubert, 1979, 155-160). Experientia, 7, 128-134.
25. Lorenzi, C., Debruille, L., Garnier, S., et al. (2009). Abnormal processing of temporal fine structure in speech for frequencies where absolute thresholds are normal. J Acoust Soc Am, 125, 27-30.
26. Meddis, R., & Hewitt, M. J. (1991a). Virtual pitch and phase sensitivity of a computer model of the auditory periphery. I: Pitch identification. J Acoust Soc Am, 89, 2883-2894.
27. Meddis, R., & Hewitt, M. J. (1991b). Virtual pitch and phase sensitivity of a computer model of the auditory periphery. II: Phase sensitivity. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 233-245.
28. Murry, T., & Singh, S. (1980). Multidimentional analysis of male and female voices. J Acoust Soc Am, 68, 1294-1300.
29. Peelle, J. E., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Dissociations in perceptual learning revealed by adult age differences in adaptation to time-compressed speech. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 31, 1315-1330. (Pubitemid 43246383)
30. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., MacDonald, E., et al. (2007). Temporal jitter disrupts speech intelligibility: A simulation of auditory aging. Hear Res, 223, 114-1121.
31. Purcell, D. W., John, S. M., Schneider, B. A., et al. (2004). Human temporal auditory acuity as assessed by envelope following responses. J Acoust Soc Am, 116, 3581-3593. (Pubitemid 40029939)
32. Qin, M. K., & Oxenham, A. J. (2005). Effects of envelope-vocoder processing on F0 discrimination and concurrent-vowel identification. Ear Hear, 26, 451-460. (Pubitemid 41510891)
33. Ritsma, R. J. (1967). Frequencies dominant in the perception of the pitch of complex sounds. J Acoust Soc Am, 42, 191-198.
34. Schvartz, K. C., Chatterjee, M., Gordon-Salant, S. (2008). Recognition of spectrally degraded phonemes by younger, middle-aged, and older normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 124, 3972-3988.
35. Shackleton, T. M., & Carlyon, R. P. (1994). The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 3529-3540. (Pubitemid 24189504)
36. Shannon, R. V. (1992). Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 2156-2164.
37. Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F. G., Kamath, V.,et al. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science, 270, 303-304.
38. Sheldon, S., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A. (2008a). Priming and sentence context support listening to noise-vocoded speech by younger and older adults. J Acoust Soc Am, 123, 489-499.
39. Sheldon, S., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A. (2008b). Effect of age, presentation method, and learning on identification of noise-vocoded words. J Acoust Soc Am, 123, 476-488.
40. Schouten, J. F. (1940). The residue and the mechanism of hearing. Proc Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen A, 43, 991-999.
41. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A 'rationalized' arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 28, 455-463.
42. Summers, V., & Leek, M. R. (1998). F0 processing and the separation of competing speech signals by listeners with normal hearing and with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41, 1294-1306. (Pubitemid 28563615)
43. Terhardt, E. (1974). Pitch, consonance and harmony. J Acoust Soc Am, 55, 1061-1069.
44. Vermeire, K., Brokx, J. P. L., Wuyts, F. L., et al. (2005). Quality of life benefit from cochlear implantation in the elderly. Otol Neurotol, 26, 188-195. (Pubitemid 40418651)
45. von Helmholtz, H. (1877). On the Sensations of Tone (English translation A. J. Ellis, 1885, reprinted 1954). Dover, New York.
46. Vongpaisal, T., & Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2007). Effect of age on F0 difference limen and concurrent vowel identification. J Speech Hear Lang Res, 50, 1139-1156. (Pubitemid 350058545)
47. Vongpaisal, T., Trehub, S. E., Schellenberg, E. G., et al. (2010). Children with cochlear implants recognize their mother's voice. Ear Hear, 31, 555-566.
48. Vongphoe, M., & Zeng. F. G. (2005). Speaker recognition with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 1055-1061. (Pubitemid 41129238)
49. Walton, J. P., Simon, H., Frisina, R. D. (2002). Age-related alterations in the neural coding of envelope periodicities. J Neurophysiol, 88, 565-578. (Pubitemid 34874391)
50. Wightman, F. L. (1973). The pattern transformation model of pitch. J Acoust Soc Am, 54, 407-416.