The relative importance of consonant and vowel segments to the recognition of words and sentences: Effects of age and hearing loss

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 132, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 1667-1678

  Fogerty, Daniel ^a   Kewley Port, Diane ^a   Humes, Larry E ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUDITORY SENSITIVITY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; HEARING LOSS; HEARING-IMPAIRED LISTENERS; ISOLATED WORDS; SENTENCE INTELLIGIBILITY; SPECTRAL SHAPING; SPEECH-SHAPED NOISE;

AUDITION;

LINGUISTICS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PATIENT; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; RECOGNITION; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AGING; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CUES; FEMALE; HEARING IMPAIRED PERSONS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84866286097     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.4739463     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. ANSI. (1997). ANSI S3.5-1995, American national standard methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index. (American National Standards Institute, New York).
2. Burke, D. M., and Mackay, D. G. (1997). Memory, language, and ageing., Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 352, 1845-1856. 10.1098/rstb.1997.0170
3. Caramazza, A., Chialant, D., Capasso, R., and Miceli, G. (2000). Separable processing of consonants and vowels., Nature 403, 428-430. 10.1038/35000206
4. Carreiras, M., Gillon-Dowens, M., Vergara, M., and Perea, M. (2009). Are vowels and consonants processed differently? Event-related potential evidence with a delayed letter paradigm., J. Cogn. Neurosci. 21, 275-288. 10.1162/jocn.2008.21023
5. Carreiras, M., and Price, C. (2008). Brain activation for consonants and vowels., Cereb. Cortex 18, 1727-1735. 10.1093/cercor/bhm202
6. Cole, R., Yan, Y., Mak, B., Fanty, M., and Bailey, T. (1996). The contribution of consonants versus vowels to word recognition in fluent speech., in Proceedings of the ICASSP'96, pp. 853-856.
7. Cooper, F., Delattre, P., Liberman, A., Borst, J., and Gerstman, L. (1952). Some experiments on the perception of synthetic speech sounds., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 24, 597-606. 10.1121/1.1906940
8. Cutler, A., and Foss, D. J. (1977). On the role of sentence stress in sentence processing., Lang Speech. 20, 1-10.
9. Dreschler, W. A. (1989). Phoneme perception via hearing aids with and without compression and the role of temporal resolution., Audiology 28, 49-60. 10.3109/00206098909081610
10. Fitzgibbons, P. J., and Gordon-Salant, S. (2004). Age effects on discrimination of timing in auditory sequences., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 1126-1134. 10.1121/1.1765192
11. Fogerty, D. (2011). Perceptual weighting of individual and concurrent cues for sentence intelligibility: Frequency, envelope, and fine structure., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 129, 977-988. 10.1121/1.3531954
12. Fogerty, D., and Humes, L. E. (2010). Perceptual contributions to monosyllabic word intelligibility: Segmental, lexical, and noise replacement factors., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 3114-3125. 10.1121/1.3493439
13. Fogerty, D., and Humes, L. E. (2012). The role of vowel and consonant fundamental frequency, envelope, and temporal fine structure cues to the intelligibility of words and sentences., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1490-1501. 10.1121/1.3676696
14. Fogerty, D., and Kewley-Port, D. (2009). Perceptual contributions of the consonant-vowel boundary to sentence intelligibility., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 847-857. 10.1121/1.3159302
15. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., and 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. 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6
16. Freyman, R. L., Nerbonne, G. P., and Cote, H. A. (1991). Effect of consonant-vowel ratio modification on amplitude envelope cues for consonant recognition., J. Speech Hear. Res. 34, 415-426.
17. Garofolo, J., Lamel, L., Fisher, W., Fiscus, J., Pallett, D., and Dahlgren, N. (1990). DARPA TIMIT Acoustic-Phonetic Continuous Speech Corpus CD-ROM, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NTIS Order No. PB91-505065.
18. Gay, T. (1978). Effect of speaking rate on vowel formant movements., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63, 223-230. 10.1121/1.381717
19. Gordon-Salant, S. (1986). Recognition of natural and time/intensity altered CVs by young and elderly subjects with normal hearing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80, 1599-1607. 10.1121/1.394324
20. Gordan-Salant, S., and Fitzgibbons, P. J. (1997). Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners., J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 40, 423-231.
21. Humes, L. E. (2002). Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 1112-1132. 10.1121/1.1499132
22. 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, 609-623. 10.3766/jaaa.18.7.6
23. Humes, L. E., Burk, M. H., Coughlin, M. P., Busey, T. A., and Strauser, L. E. (2007). Auditory speech recognition and visual text recognition in younger and older adults: similarities and differences between modalities and the effects of presentation rate., J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 50, 283-303. 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/021)
24. Jenstad, L. M., and Souza, P. E. (2007). Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: Combined effects on recognition for older adults., J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 50, 1123-1138. 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/078)
25. Kewley-Port, D., Burkle, Z., and Lee, J. (2007). Contribution of consonant versus vowel information to sentence intelligibility for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoustic. Soc. Am. 122, 2365-2375. 10.1121/1.2773986
26. Kidd, G. R., and Humes, L. E. (2012). Effects of age and hearing loss on the recognition of interrupted words in isolation and in sentences., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1434-1448. 10.1121/1.3675975
27. Ladefoged, P. (2001). Vowels and Consonants: An Introduction to the Sounds of Languages (Blackwell, Oxford), pp. 1-191.
28. Lehiste, I. (1970). Suprasegmentals (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 1-194.
29. Liberman, A. M., Delattre, P., and Cooper, F. S. (1952). The role of selected stimulus variables in the perception of unvoiced stop consonants., Am. J. Psychiatry 65, 497-516. 10.2307/1418032
30. Max, L., and Caruso, A. J. (1997). Acoustic measures of temporal intervals across speaking rates: Variability of syllable- and phrase-level relative timing., J. Speech Hear. Res. 40, 1097-1110.
31. Mehler, J., Peña, M., Nespor, M., and Bonatti, L. (2006). The soul' of language does not use statistics: Reflections on vowels and consonants., Cortex 42, 846-54. 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70427-1
32. Miller, G., and Licklider, J. (1950). The intelligibility of interrupted speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 22, 167-173. 10.1121/1.1906584
33. Miller, G. A. (1951). Language and Communication (McGraw-Hill, New York), pp. 1-298.
34. Nespor, M., Peña, M., and Mehler, J. (2003). On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition., Lingue e Linguaggio 2, 201-227.
35. New, B., Araújo, V., and Nazzi, T. (2008). Differential processing of vowels and consonants in lexical access through reading., Psychol. Sci. 19, 1223-1227. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02228.x
36. Owren, M. J., and Cardillo, G. C. (2006). The relative roles of vowels and consonants in discriminating talker identity versus word meaning., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 1727-1739. 10.1121/1.2161431
37. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., and Daneman, M. (1995). How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 593-608. 10.1121/1.412282
38. Ramus, F., Nespor, M., and Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal., Cognition 73, 265-292. 10.1016/S0010-0277(99) 00058-X
39. Rhebergen, K. S., and Versfeld, N. J. (2005). 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, 2181-2192. 10.1121/1.1861713
40. Rosen, S. (1992). Temporal information in speech: Acoustic, auditory, and linguistic aspects., Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 336, 367-373. 10.1098/rstb.1992.0070
41. Sammeth, C. A., Dorman, M. F., and Stearns, C. J. (1999). The role of consonant-vowel intensity ratio in the recognition of voiceless stop consonants by listeners with hearing impairment., J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 42, 42-55.
42. Seewald, R. C., Ramji, K. V., Sinclair, S. T., Moodie, K. S., and Jamieson, D. G. (1993). Computer-assisted implementation of the desired sensation level method for electroacoustic selection and fitting in children: Version 3.1, User's Manual., The University of Western Ontario, London.
43. Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F.-G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J., and Ekelid, M. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues., Science 270, 303-304. 10.1126/science.270.5234.303
44. Shields, J. L., McHugh, A., and Martin, J. G. (1974). Reaction time to phoneme targets as a function of rhythmic cues in continuous speech., J. Exp. Psychol. 102, 250-255. 10.1037/h0035855
45. Shrivastav, M. N., Humes, L. E., and Aylsworth, L. (2008). Temporal-order discrimination of tonal sequences by younger and older adults: The role of duration and rate., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 462-471. 10.1121/1.2932089
46. Souza, P. E., and Kitch, V. (2001). The contribution of amplitude envelope cues to sentence identification in young and aged listeners., Ear Hear. 22, 112-119. 10.1097/00003446-200104000-00004
47. Stevens, K. N. (2002). Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 1872-1891. 10.1121/1.1458026
48. Stilp, C., and Kluender, K. (2010). Cochlea-scaled entropy, not consonants, vowels, or time, best predicts speech intelligibility., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 12387-12392. 10.1073/pnas.0913625107
49. Strange, W., Jenkins, J. J., and Johnson, T. L. (1983). Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74, 695-705. 10.1121/1.389855
50. Strom, K. E. (2006). The HR 2006 dispenser survey., Hear Rev. 13, 16-39.
51. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A rationalized' arcsine transform., J. Speech Hear. Res. 28, 455-462.
52. Tajima, K., and Port, R. F. (2003). Speech rhythm in English and Japanese., in Phonetic Interpretation: Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI, edited by, J. Local, R. Ogden, and, R. Temple, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), pp. 317-334.
53. Takayanagi, S., Dirks, D., and Moshfegh, A. (2002). Lexical and talker effects on word recognition among native and non-native listeners with normal and impaired hearing., J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 16, 494-504.
54. Toro, J. M., Nespor, M., Mehler, J., and Bonatti, L. L. (2008). Finding words and rules in a speech stream: Functional differences between vowels and consonants., Psychol. Sci. 19, 137-144. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02059.x
55. Waibel, A. (1987). Prosodic knowledge sources for word hypothesization in a continuous speech recognition system., in Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, IEEE International Conference on ICASSP'87, pp. 856-859.
56. Wang, X., and Humes, L. E. (2010). Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 2100-2111. 10.1121/1.3483733
57. Wingfield, A., Aberdeen, J. S., and Stine, E. A. L. (1991). Word onset gating and linguistic context in spoken word recognition by young and elderly adults., J Gerontol. 46, P127-P129.
58. Wingfield, A., Alexander, A. H., and Cavigelli, S. (1994). Does memory constrain utilization of top-down information in spoken word recognition? Evidence from normal aging., Lang Speech 37, 221-235.
59. Wingfield, A., Lombardi, L., and Sokol, S. (1984). Prosodic features and the intelligibility of accelerated speech: Syntactic versus periodic segmentation., J. Speech Hear. Res. 27, 128-134.
60. Zue, V. W., and Seneff, S. (1988). Transcription and alignment of the TIMIT database., Proceedings of the Second Meeting on Advanced Man-Machine Interface through Spoken Language, pp. 11.1-11.10.
61. Zurek, P. M., and Delhorne, L. A. (1987). Consonant reception in noise by listeners with mild and moderate sensorineural hearing impairment., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 1548-1559. 10.1121/1.395145