Effects of noise suppression on intelligibility: Experts' opinions and naïve normal-hearing listeners' performance

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 56, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 404-425

  Hilkhuysen, Gaston L M ^a   Gaubitch, Nikolay ^b   Huckvale, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Noise suppression; Opinion based intelligibility; Performance based intelligibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CHILD; EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEARING; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NOISE; NOISE REDUCTION; OPINION-BASED INTELLIGIBILITY; PERFORMANCE-BASED INTELLIGIBILITY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REFERENCE VALUE; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; DEVICES; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES;

NOISE SUPPRESSION; OPINION-BASED INTELLIGIBILITY; PERFORMANCE-BASED INTELLIGIBILITY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AUDIOLOGY; CHILD; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEARING; HEARING AIDS; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REFERENCE VALUES; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84878050187     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0286)     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Agresti, A. (2007). An introduction to categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1997). Methods for calculation of the speech intelligibility index (ANSI S3.5-1997). New York, NY: Author.
3. Arehart, K. H., Hansen, J. H. L., Gallant, S., & Kalstein, L. (2003). Evaluation of an auditory masked threshold noise suppression algorithm in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Speech Communication, 40, 575-592.
4. Arehart, K. H., Kates, J. M., Anderson, M. C., & Harvey, L. O., Jr. (2007). Effects of noise and distortion on speech quality judgments in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122, 1150-1164.
5. Beck, W. G., & Speaks, C. (1993). Intelligibility of selected passages from the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1075-1082.
6. Boll, S. F. (1979). Suppression of acoustic noise in speech using spectral subtraction. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 27, 113-120.
7. Cienkowski, K. M., & Speaks, C. (2000). Subjective vs. objective intelligibility of sentences in listeners with hearing loss. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1205-1210.
8. Cox, R. M., & McDaniel, D. M. (1989). Development of the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 347-352.
9. Fabry, D. A., & Van Tasell, D. J. (1990). Evaluation of an articulation-index based model for predicting the effects of adaptive frequency response hearing aids. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 676-689.
10. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London, UK: Arnold.
11. Goldsworthy, R. L., & Greenberg, J. E. (2004). Analysis of speech-based Speech Transmission Index methods with implications for nonlinear operations. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 3679-3689.
12. Gray, T. F., & Speaks, C. E. (1978). Ability of hearing-impaired listeners to understand connected discourse. Journal of the American Audiology Society, 3, 159-166.
13. Hilkhuysen, G., Gaubitch, N., Brookes, M., & Huckvale, M. (2012). Effects of noise suppression on intelligibility: Dependency on signal-to-noise ratios. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131, 531-539.
14. Houben, R., van Doorn-Bierman, M., & Dreschler, W. A. (2013). Using response time to speech as a measure for listening effort. Manuscript submitted for publication.
15. Howard, C. S., Munro, K. J., & Plack, C. J. (2010). Listening effort at signal-to-noise ratios that are typical of the school classroom. International Journal of Audiology, 49, 928-932.
16. Hox, J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2007a). A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122, 1777-1786.
18. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2007b). Subjective comparison and evaluation of speech enhancement algorithms. Speech Communication, 49, 588-601.
19. International Organization for Standardization. (2004). Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment-Part 8: Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and circumaural earphones (ISO 389-8:2004) Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
20. Lim, J. S. (1978). Evaluation of a correlation subtraction method for enhancing speech degraded by additive white noise. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 26, 471-472.
21. Loizou, P. C. (2007). Speech enhancement: Theory and practice. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
22. Loizou, P. C., & Ma, J. (2011). Extending the articulation index to account for non-linear distortions introduced by noise-suppression algorithms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130, 986-995.
23. Ludvigsen, C., Elberling, C., & Keidser, G. (1993). Evaluation of noise reduction method: Comparison between observed scores and scores predicted from STI. Scandinavian Audiology, 38, 50-55.
24. Ma, J., Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2009). Objective measures for predicting speech intelligibility in noisy conditions based on new band-importance functions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125, 3387-3405.
25. Magnusson, L., Karlsson, M., Ringdahl, A., & Israelsson, B. (2001). Comparison of calculated, measured and self-assessed intelligibility of speech in noise for hearing-aid users. Scandinavian Audiology, 30, 160-171.
26. Max, L., & Onghena, P. (1999). Some issues in the statistical analysis of completely randomized and repeated measures designs for speech, language, and hearing research. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 261-270.
27. McDaniel, D. M., & Cox, R. M. (1992). Evaluation of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 686-693.
28. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29. Purdy, S. C., & Pavlovic, C. V. (1992). Reliability, sensitivity and validity of magnitude estimation, category scaling and paired-comparison judgments of speech-intelligibility by older listeners. Audiology, 31, 254-271.
30. Quené, H., & Van Den Bergh, H. (2004). On multi-level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: A tutorial. Speech Communication, 43, 103-121.
31. Rankovic, C. M., & Levy, R. M. (1997). Estimating articulation scores. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 3754-3761.
32. Rothauser, E. H., Chapman, W. D., Guttman, N., Silbiger, H. R., Hecker, M. H. L., Urbanek, G. E., Weinstock, M. (1969). IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, AU17, 225-246.
33. Sarampalis, A., Kalluri, S., Edwards, B., & Hafter, E. (2009). Objective measures of listening effort: Effects of background noise and noise reduction. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 1230-1240.
34. Smith, M. W., & Faulkner, A. (2006). Perceptual adaptation by normally hearing listeners to a simulated "hole" in hearing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 4019-4030.
35. Studebaker, G. A., Bisset, J. D., Van Ort, D. M., & Hoffnung, S. U. (1982). Paired comparison judgments of relative intelligibility in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 72, 80-92.
36. Taal, C. H., Hendriks, R. C., Heusdens, R., & Jensen, J. (2011). An algorithm for intelligibility prediction of time-frequency weighted noisy speech. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 19, 2125-2136.
37. Tsoukalas, D. E., Mourjopoulos, J. N., & Kokkinakis, G. (1997). Speech enhancement based on audible noise suppression. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 5, 497-514.
38. Varga, A., & Steeneken, H. J. M. (1993). Assessment for automatic speech recognition: II. NOISEX-92: A database and an experiment to study the effect of additive noise on speech recognition systems. Speech Communication, 12, 247-251.