Estimation of signal-to-noise ratios in realistic sound scenarios

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 183-196

  Smeds, Karolina ^a   Wolters, Florian ^a   Rung, Martin ^b  

^a ORCA Europe   (Sweden)

^b Widex A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Audiology; Hearing aids and assistive devices; Laboratory tests; Signal to noise ratio; SNR

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS; ACOUSTICS; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; ENVIRONMENT; HEARING AID; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; NOISE MEASUREMENT; NOISE REDUCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SOUND PRESSURE; SPEECH ANALYSIS; VERY ELDERLY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TEST;

ENVIRONMENT; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS;

EID: 84923177479     PISSN: 10500545     EISSN: 21573107     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.26.2.7     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Banerjee S. (2011) Hearing aids in the real world: use of multimemory and volume controls. J Am Acad Audiol 22(6):359-374.
2. Best V, Keidser G, Buchholz JM, Freeston K. (2013) Psychometric effects of adding realism to a speech-in-noise test. Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics (POMA) 19.
3. Brennan M, Souza P. (2009) Effects of expansion on consonant recognition and consonant audibility. J Am Acad Audiol 20(2): 119-127.
4. Cox RM, Alexander GC. (1994) Prediction of hearing aid benefit: the role of preferred listening levels. Ear Hear 15(1):22-29.
5. Gifford RH, Olund AP, Dejong M. (2011) Improving speech perception in noise for children with cochlear implants. J Am Acad Audiol 22(9):623-632.
6. Hagerman B. (1982) Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol 11(2):79-87.
7. Hagerman B. (1984) Clinical measurements of speech reception threshold in noise. Scand Audiol 13(1):57-63.
8. Hagerman B, Kinnefors C. (1995) Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise. Scand Audiol 24(1):71-77.
9. Hochmuth S, Brand T, Zokoll MA, Castro FZ, Wardenga N, Kollmeier B. (2012) A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise. Int J Audiol 51(7): 536-544.
10. Hoetink AE, Körössy L, Dreschler WA. (2009) Classification of steady state gain reduction produced by amplitude modulation based noise reduction in digital hearing aids. Int J Audiol 48:(7):444-455.
11. Hornsby BW. (2013) The effects of hearing aid use on listening effort and mental fatigue associated with sustained speech processing demands. Ear Hear 34(5):523-534.
12. Hornsby BW, Ricketts TA. (2001) The effects of compression ratio, signal-to-noise ratio, and level on speech recognition in normalhearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 109(6):2964-2973.
13. Jensen NS, Nielsen C. (2005) Auditory ecology in a group of experienced hearing-aid users: Can knowledge about hearing-aid users' auditory ecology improve their rehabilitation? In: Rasmussen AN, Poulsen T, Andersen T, Larsen CB, eds. 21st Danavox Symposium. Danavox Jubilee Foundation, Kolding, Denmark: 235-258.
14. Klink KB, Schulte M, Meis M. (2012) Measuring listening effort in the field of audiology - a literature review of methods (part 2). Z Audiol 51(3):96-105.
15. Kochkin S. (2010) Marke Trak VIII: Consumer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing. Hear J 63(1):19-32.
16. Laugesen S, Rønne FM, Jensen NS, Sorgenfrei MG. (2014) Validation of a spatial speech-in-speech test that takes signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) confounds into account. In: Dau T, Santurette S, Dalsgaard JC, Tranebjaerg L, Andersen T, Poulsen T, eds. 4th International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research (ISAAR) 2013. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation, Nyborg, Denmark: 397-404.
17. Lunner T, Sundewall-Thorén E. (2007) Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: effects on speech-innoise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol 18(7):604-617.
18. Luts H, Eneman K, Wouters J, et al. (2010) Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 127(3):1491-1505.
19. Mackersie CL, Cones H. (2011) Subjective and psychophysiological indexes of listening effort in a competing-talker task. J Am Acad Audiol 22(2):113-122.
20. Miller GA, Nicely PE. (1955) An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J Acoust Soc Am 27:338-353.
21. Moore BC. (1996) Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. Ear Hear 17(2):133-161.
22. Naylor G, Johannesson RB. (2009) Long-term signal-to-noise ratio at the input and output of amplitude-compression systems. J Am Acad Audiol 20(3):161-171.
23. Ng EH, Rudner M, Lunner T, Pedersen MS, Rönnberg J. (2013) Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol 52(7):433-441.
24. Olsen WO. (1998) Average speech levels and spectra in various speaking/listening conditions: A summary of the Pearson, Bennett, & Fidell (1977) report. Am J Audiol 7(2):21-25.
25. Pearsons KS, Bennett RL, Fidell S. (1977) Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments. Project report on contract 68 01-2466. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
26. Plomp R. (1978) Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 63(2):533-549.
27. Plyler PN, Trine TD, Blair Hill A. (2006) The subjective evaluation of the expansion time constant in single-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing instruments. Int J Audiol 45(6):331-336.
28. Sarampalis A, Kalluri S, Edwards B, Hafter E. (2009) Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. J Speech Lang Hear Res 52(5):1230-1240.
29. Smeds K, Bergman N, Hertzman S, Nyman T. (2009) Noise reduction in modern hearing aids - Long-term average gain measurements using speech. In: Buchholz JM, Dau T, Dalsgaard JC, Poulsen T, eds. The International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research (ISAAR). Binaural Processing and Spatial Hearing. Helsingør, Denmark: 445-452.
30. Teder H. (1990) Noise and speech levels in noisy environments. Hear Instrum 41:32-33.
31. Wagener K, Josvassen JL, Ardenkjaer R. (2003) Design, optimization and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise. Int J Audiol 42(1):10-17.
32. Wagener KC, Brand T. (2005) Sentence intelligibility in noise for listeners with normal hearing and hearing impairment: influence of measurement procedure and masking parameters. Int J Audiol 44(3):144-156.
33. Wagener KC, Hansen M, Ludvigsen C. (2008) Recording and classification of the acoustic environment of hearing aid users. J Am Acad Audiol 19(4):348-370.
34. Zekveld AA, Kramer SE, Festen JM. (2010) Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility. Ear Hear 31(4):480-490.