The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 133, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 3004-3015

  Smits, Cas ^a   Festen, Joost M ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL DATUM; HEARING-IMPAIRED LISTENERS; LINEAR FUNCTIONS; NORMAL-HEARING LISTENERS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY INDEX; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD;

AUDITION; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO;

AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CASE CONTROL STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; PATIENT; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGY; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; RECOGNITION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PERSONS WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENTS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84877590740     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.4798667     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ANSI (1997). ANSI S3.5-1997, American National Standard methods for the calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index (American National Standards Institute, New York).
2. Bacon, S. P., Opie, J. M., and Montoya, D. Y. (1998). The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds., J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 41, 549-563.
3. Bernstein, J. G., and Brungart, D. S. (2011). Effects of spectral smearing and temporal fine-structure distortion on the fluctuating-masker benefit for speech at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 473-488. 10.1121/1.3589440
4. Bernstein, J. G., and Grant, K. W. (2009). Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 3358-3372. 10.1121/1.3110132
5. Buss, E., Whittle, L. N., Grose, J. H., and Hall, J. W., 3rd. (2009). Masking release for words in amplitude-modulated noise as a function of modulation rate and task., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 269-280. 10.1121/1.3129506
6. Desloge, J. G., Reed, C. M., Braida, L. D., Perez, Z. D., and Delhorne, L. A. (2010). Speech reception by listeners with real and simulated hearing impairment: Effects of continuous and interrupted noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 342-359. 10.1121/1.3436522
7. Dirks, D. D., Wilson, R. H., and Bower, D. R. (1969). Effect of pulsed masking on selected speech materials., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 46, 898-906. 10.1121/1.1911808
8. Dubno, J. R., Horwitz, A. R., and Ahlstrom, J. B. (2002). Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 2897-2907. 10.1121/1.1480421
9. Festen, J. M., and Plomp, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 1725-1736. 10.1121/1.400247
10. George, E. L., Festen, J. M., and Houtgast, T. (2006). Factors affecting masking release for speech in modulated noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 2295-2311. 10.1121/1.2266530
11. George, E. L., Festen, J. M., and Houtgast, T. (2008). The combined effects of reverberation and nonstationary noise on sentence intelligibility., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 1269-1277. 10.1121/1.2945153
12. George, E. L., Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., Goverts, S. T., Festen, J. M., and Houtgast, T. (2007). Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2362-2375. 10.1121/1.2642072
13. Gustafsson, H. A., and Arlinger, S. D. (1994). Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 518-529. 10.1121/1.408346
14. Hagerman, B. (2002). Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects., Int. J. Audiol. 41, 321-329. 10.3109/14992020209090406
15. Hopkins, K., and Moore, B. (2009). The contribution of temporal fine structure to the intelligibility of speech in steady and modulated noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 442-446. 10.1121/1.3037233
16. Kates, J. M. (1987). The short-time articulation index., J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 24, 271-276.
17. Killion, M. C. (2002). New thinking on hearing in noise: A generalized articulation index., Sem. Hear. 23, 57-75. 10.1055/s-2002-24976
18. Killion, M. C., and Christensen, L. A. (1998). The case of the missing dots: AI and SNR loss., Hear. J. 51, 32-47.
19. Léger, A. C., Moore, B. C. J., and Lorenzi, C. (2012). Temporal and spectral masking release in low- and mid-frequency regions for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1502-1514. 10.1121/1.3665993
20. Ma, J., Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2009). Objective measures for predicting speech intelligibility in noisy conditions based on new band-importance functions., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 3387-3405. 10.1121/1.3097493
21. Oxenham, A. J., and Simonson, A. M. (2009). Masking release for low- and high-pass-filtered speech in the presence of noise and single-talker interference., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 457-468. 10.1121/1.3021299
22. Plomp, R., and Mimpen, A. M. (1979). Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences., Audiology 18, 43-52. 10.3109/00206097909072618
23. Qin, M. K., and Oxenham, A. J. (2003). Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114, 446-454. 10.1121/1.1579009
24. 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
25. Rhebergen, K. S., Versfeld, N. J., de Laat, J. A., and Dreschler, W. A. (2010). Modelling the speech reception threshold in non-stationary noise in hearing-impaired listeners as a function of level., Int. J. Audiol. 49, 856-865. 10.3109/14992027.2010.498446
26. Rhebergen, K. S., Versfeld, N. J., and Dreschler, W. A. (2006). Extended speech intelligibility index for the prediction of the speech reception threshold in fluctuating noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 3988-3997. 10.1121/1.2358008
27. Shafiro, V., Sheft, S., and Risley, R. (2011). Perception of interrupted speech: Effects of dual-rate gating on the intelligibility of words and sentences., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 2076-2087. 10.1121/1.3631629
28. Sherbecoe, R. L., and Studebaker, G. A. (2002). Audibility-index functions for the connected speech test., Ear Hear. 23, 385-398. 10.1097/00003446-200210000-00001
29. Smits, C., and Festen, J. M. (2011). The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: steady-state noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 2987-2998. 10.1121/1.3644909
30. Smits, C., and Houtgast, T. (2006). Measurements and calculations on the simple up-down adaptive procedure for speech-in-noise tests., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 1608-1621. 10.1121/1.2221405
31. Smits, C., and Houtgast, T. (2007). Recognition of digits in different types of noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., Int. J. Audiol. 46, 134-144. 10.1080/14992020601102170
32. Stone, M. A., Füllgrabe, C., and Moore, B. C. (2012). Notionally steady background noise acts primarily as a modulation masker of speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132, 317-326. 10.1121/1.4725766
33. Studebaker, G. A., and Sherbecoe, R. L. (1991). Frequency-importance and transfer functions for recorded CID W-22 word lists., J. Speech Hear. Res. 34, 427-438.
34. Taylor, M. M. (1971). On the efficiency of psychophysical measurements., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49, 505-508. 10.1121/1.1912379
35. Versfeld, N. J., Daalder, L., Festen, J. M., and Houtgast, T. (2000). Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurements of the speech reception threshold., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 1671-1684. 10.1121/1.428451
36. Wang, X., and Humes, L. E. (2010). Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 2100-2111. 10.1121/1.3483733
37. Wong, L. L., Ho, A. H., Chua, E. W., and Soli, S. D. (2007). Development of the Cantonese speech intelligibility index., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2350-2361. 10.1121/1.2431338