Listening effort and perceived clarity for normal-hearing children with the use of digital noise reduction

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 183-194

  Gustafson, Samantha ^a,c   Mccreery, Ryan ^b   Hoover, Brenda ^b   Kopun, Judy G ^b   Stelmachowicz, Pat ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BOYS TOWN NATIONAL RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Children; Digital noise reduction; Hearing aids; Listening effort

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHILD; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; NORMAL HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ALGORITHMS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CHILD; FEMALE; HEALTHY VOLUNTEERS; HEARING AIDS; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84894548280     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: 15384667     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.aud.0000440715.85844.b8     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Alcántara, J. L., Moore, B. C., Kühnel, V., et al. (2003). Evaluation of the noise reduction system in a commercial digital hearing aid. Int J Audiol, 42, 34-42
2. Anzalone, M. C., Calandruccio, L., Doherty, K. A., et al. (2006). Determination of the potential benefit of time-frequency gain manipulation. Ear Hear, 27, 480-492
3. Arnold, P., & Canning, D. (1999). Does classroom amplification aid comprehensioñBr J Audiol, 33, 171-178
4. Bankson, N. W., & Bernthal, J. E. (1990). Quick Screen of Phonology. San Antonio, TX: Special Press, Inc
5. Bentler, R., & Chiou, L. K. (2006). Digital noise reduction: An overview. Trends Amplif, 10, 67-82
6. Bentler, R., Wu, Y. H., Kettel, J., et al. (2008). Digital noise reduction: Outcomes from laboratory and field studies. Int J Audiol, 47, 447-460
7. Boymans, M., & Dreschler, W. A. (2000). Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Audiology, 39, 260-268
8. Bradley, J. S., & Sato, H. (2008). The intelligibility of speech in elementary school classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am, 123, 2078-2086
9. Chung, K. (2004). Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies and noise reduction algorithms. Trends Amplif, 8, 83-124
10. Cowan, N., Towse, J. N., Hamilton, Z., et al. (2003). Children's working-memory processes: A response-Timing analysis. J Exp Psychol, 132(1), 113-132
11. Crandell, C. C., & Smaldino, J. J. (1995) Speech perception in the classroom. In C. Crandell, J. J. Smaldino & C. Flexer (Eds). Sound-field FM Amplification: Theory and Practical Applications (pp. 29-48). San Diego, CA: Singular Publication Group
12. Crandell, C. C., & Smaldino, J. J. (2000). Classroom acoustics for children with normal hearing and with hearing impairment. Lang Sp Hear Serv Sch, 31, 362-370
13. Gatehouse, S., & Gordon, J. (1990). Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. Br J Audiol, 24(1), 63-68
14. Hagerman, B., & Olofson, A. (2004). A method to measure the effect of noise reduction algorithms using simultaneous speech and noise. Acta Acustica, 90, 356-361
15. Hallgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B., et al. (2001). Evaluation of a cognitive test battery in young and elderly normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 357-370
16. Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B., et al. (2005). Speech understanding in quiet and noise, with and without hearing aids. Int J Audiol, 44, 574-583
17. Heathcote, A., Popiel, S. J., Mewhort, D. J. K. (1991). Analysis of response time distributions: An example using the stroop task. Psychol Bull, 109(2), 340-347
18. Hervey, A.S., Epstein, J.N., Curry, J.F., et al. (2006). Reaction time distribution analysis of neuropsychological performance in an ADHD sample. Child Neuropsychol, 12(2), 125-140
19. Hick, C. B., & Tharpe, A. M. (2002). Listening effort and fatigue in school-Age children with and without hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 45, 573-584
20. Hoetink, A. E., Körössy, L., Dreschler, W. A. (2009). Classification of steady state gain reduction produced by amplitude modulation based noise reduction in digital hearing aids. Int J Audiol, 48, 444-455
21. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2007). A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms. J Acoust Soc Am, 122, 1777
22. Jamieson, D. G., Brennan, R. L., Cornelisse, L. E. (1995). Evaluation of a speech enhancement strategy with normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear, 16, 274-286
23. Jerger, S. (2007). Current state of knowledge: Perceptual processing by children with hearing impairment. Ear Hear, 28, 754-765
24. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
25. Kates, J. M. (2008). Digital Hearing Aids. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing Inc
26. Kates, J. M., & Arehart, K. H. (2005). Coherence and the speech intelligibility index. J Acoust Soc Am, 117(4 Pt 1), 2224-2237
27. Larsby, B., Hällgren, M., Lyxell, B., et al. (2005). Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: Effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Int J Audiol, 44, 131-143
28. Lewis, J. D., Goodman, S. S., Bentler, R. A. (2010). Measurement of hearing aid internal noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 127, 2521-2528
29. Luts, H., Eneman, K., Wouters, J., et al. (2010). Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 127, 1491-1505
30. Ma, J., & Loizou, P. C. (2011). SNR Loss: A new objective measure for predicting speech intelligibility of noise-suppressed speech. Speech Commun, 53, 340-354
31. Mackersie, C., Neuman, A. C., Levitt, H. (1999). A comparison of response time and word recognition measures using a word-monitoring and closed-set identification task. Ear Hear, 20, 140-148
32. McCreery, R., Ito, R., Spratford, M., et al. (2010). Performance- intensity functions for normal-hearing adults and children using computer-Aided speech perception assessment. Ear Hear, 31, 95-101
33. McCreery, R. W., & Stelmachowicz, P. G. (2011). Audibility-based predictions of speech recognition for children and adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 130, 4070-4081
34. Mueller, H. G., Weber, J., Hornsby, B. W. (2006). The effects of digital noise reduction on the acceptance of background noise. Trends Amplif, 10, 83-93
35. Natarajan, A., Hansen, J., Arehart, K., et al. (2005). An auditory-masking threshold-based noise suppression algorithm for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss, EURASIP. J Appl Signal Proc, 18, 2938-2953
36. Naylor, G., & Johannesson, R. B. (2009). Long-Term signal-To-noise ratio at the input and output of amplitude-compression systems. J Am Acad Audiol, 20, 161-171
37. Ng, E. H. N., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., et al. (2013). Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-Aid users. Int J Audiol, 52, 433-441
38. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., Daneman, M. (1995). How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 593-608
39. Pisoni, D. B., Kronenberger, W. G., Roman, A. S., et al. (2011). Measures of digit span and verbal rehearsal speed in deaf children after more than 10 years of cochlear implantation. Ear Hear, 32(1 Suppl), 60S-74S
40. Pittman, A. (2011a). Age-related benefits of digital noise reduction for short-Term word learning in children with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 54, 1448-1463
41. Pittman, A. (2011b). Children's performance in complex listening conditions: Effects of hearing loss and digital noise reduction. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 54, 1224-1239
42. Rakerd, B., Seitz, P. F., Whearty, M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive demands of speech listening for people with hearing losses. Ear Hear, 17, 97-106
43. Ratliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychol Bull, 86(3), 446-461
44. Ratliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychol Bull, 114(3), 512-532
45. Ricketts, T. A., & Hornsby, B. W. (2005). Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing digital noise reduction. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 270-277
46. Rouder, J. N., Sun, D., Speckman, P. L., et al. (2003). A hierarchical Bayesian statistical framework for response time distributions. Psychometrika, 68(4), 589-606
47. Sarampalis, A., Kalluri, S., Edwards, B., et al. (2009). Objective measures of listening effort: Effects of background noise and noise reduction. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 52, 1230-1240
48. Scollie, S., Seewald, R., Cornelisse, L., et al. (2005). The desired sensation level multistage input/output algorithm. Trends Amplif, 9, 159-197
49. Slocomb, D., & Spencer, K. A. (2009). The effect of feedback schedule manipulation on speech priming patterns and reaction time. J Psycholinguist Res, 38, 43-64
50. Souza, P., Jenstad, L. M., Boike, K. T. (2006). Measuring the acoustic effects of compression amplification on speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 119(1), 41-44
51. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context. J Exp Psychol Gen, 112, 1-36
52. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Lewis, D. E., Hoover, B. M., et al. (2010). Effects of digital noise reduction on speech perception for children with hearing loss. Ear Hear, 31(3), 345-355
53. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., et al. (2004). Novel-word learning in children with normal hearing and hearing loss. Ear Hear, 25, 47-56
54. Storkel, H. L., & Hoover, J. R. (2010). An online calculator to compute phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on the basis of child corpora of spoken American English. Behav Res Methods, 42, 497-506
55. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A rationalized arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res, 28, 455-462
56. Whelan, R. (2008). Effective analysis of reaction time data. Psychol Record, 58, 475-482
57. Wu, Y. H., & Stangl, E. (2013). The effect of hearing aid signal-processing schemes on acceptable noise levels: Perception and prediction. Ear Hear, 34(3):333-341
58. Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., Festen, J. M. (2011). Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: The influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response. Ear Hear, 32, 498-510