International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology (ICRA) recommendations for the construction of multilingual speech tests

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 54, Issue , 2015, Pages 17-22

  Akeroyd, Michael A ^a   Arlinger, Stig ^b   Bentler, Ruth A ^c   Boothroyd, Arthur ^d   Dillier, Norbert ^e   Dreschler, Wouter A ^f   Gagné, Jean Pierre ^g   Lutman, Mark ^h   Wouters, Jan ⁱ   Wong, Lena ^j   Kollmeier, Birger ^k  

^a MRC INSTITUTE OF HEARING RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^d SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^f ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^g UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^h UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ KU LEUVEN UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^j UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^k UNIVERSITY OF OLDENBURG   (Germany)

more..

Author keywords

behavioral measures; instrumentation; psychoacoustics hearing science; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE EFFECTS; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPREHENSION; CONSENSUS; HUMAN; MULTILINGUALISM; NOISE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PERCEPTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RECOGNITION; REPRODUCIBILITY; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STANDARDS;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPREHENSION; CONSENSUS; HUMANS; MULTILINGUALISM; NOISE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST;

EID: 84949230596     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1030513     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bench J., Kowal A. & Bamford J. 1979. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol, 13(3), 108-112.
2. Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2002. Effi cient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests, J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 2801-2810.
3. Hagerman B. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79-87.
4. Hagerman B. 1984. Clinical measurements of speech reception threshold in noise. Scand Audiol, 13, 57-63.
5. Hagerman B. & Kinnefors C. 1995. Effi cient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. Scand Audiol, 24, 71-77.
6. Hochmuth S., J ü rgens T., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2015. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests. Int J Audiol, submitted.
7. ISO 8253-3. 2012. Acoustics-Audiometric test methods-Part 3: Speech audiometry. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
8. Jansen S., Luts H., Dejonckere P., Van Wieringen A. & Wouters J. 2013. Effi cient hearing screening in noise-exposed listeners using the Digit Triplet test. Ear Hear, 34(6), 773-8.
9. Jansen S., Luts H., Wagener K.C., Frachet B. & Wouters J. 2010. The French digit triplet test: A hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol, 49, 378-87.
10. Kollmeier B. 1990. Messmethodik, Modellierung und Verbesserung der Verst ä ndlichkeit von Sprache (in German). (Methodology, modeling, and improvement of speech intelligibility measurements). Habilitation, Universit ä t G ö ttingen, Germany.
11. Kollmeier B., Warzybok A., Hochmuth S., Zokoll M., Uslar V. et al. 2015. The multilingual matrix test: Principles, applications and comparison across languages: A review. Int J Audiol. online fi rst, http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2015.1020971
12. Kollmeier B. & Wesselkamp M. 1997. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am, 102(4), 2412-2421.
13. MacPherson A. & Akeroyd M.A. 2014. Variations in the slope of the psychometric functions for speech intelligibility: A systematic survey. Trends Hear, 18.
14. Neumann K., Baumeister N., Baumann U., Sick U., Euler H.A. et al. 2012. Speech audiometry in quiet with the Oldenburg Sentence Test for Children. Int J Audiol, 51(3), 157-163.
15. Plomp R. & Mimpen A.M. 1979. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiol, 18(1), 43-52.
16. Risberg A. 1976. Diagnostic rhyme test for speech audiometry with severely hard of hearing and profoundly deaf children. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report, 2, 3, 40-55.
17. Smits C. & 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.
18. Smits C., Kapteyn T.S. & Houtgast T. 2004. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol, 43(1), 15-28.
19. Soli S.D. & Wong L.L.N. 2008. Assessment of speech intelligibility in noise with the Hearing in Noise Test. Int J Audiol, 47, 356-361.
20. Sotscheck J. 1985. Sprachverst ä ndlichkeit bei additiven St ö rungen. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 57(4-5), 257-267.
21. Voiers W.D. 1983. Evaluating processed speech using the diagnostic rhyme test. Speech Technology, 1(4), 30-39.
22. von Wallenberg E.L. & Kollmeier B. 1989. Sprachverst ä ndlichkeitsmessungen f ü r die Audiologie mit einem Reimtest in deutscher Sprache: Erstellung und Evaluation von Testlisten. Audiol Akustik, 28, 50-65.
23. Wagener K. & Kollmeier B. 2005. Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests mit Kindern und Oldenburger Kinder-Satztest. Z Audiol, 44(3), 134-143.
24. Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999a. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache Teil II: Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test-Part II: Optimization of the Oldenburg sentence tests). Z Audiol, 38, 44-56.
25. Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999b. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests f ü r die deutsche Sprache Teil III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test-Part III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 86-95.
26. Wagener K., K ü hnel V. & Kollmeier B. 1999c. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache I: Design des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test-Part I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 4-15.
27. Wichmann F.A. & Hill N.J. 2001a. The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fi t. Percept Psychophys, 63, 1293-313.
28. Wichmann F.A. & Hill N.J. 2001b. The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confi dence intervals and sampling. Percept Psychophys, 63, 1314-29.
29. Zokoll M., Wagener K.C., Brand T., Buscherm ö hle M. & Kollmeier B. 2012. Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: The German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype. Int J Audiol, 51, 697-707.
30. Zokoll M.A., Hochmuth S., Warzybok A., Wagener K.C., Buscherm ö hle M. et al. 2013. Speech-in-noise tests for multilingual hearing screening and diagnostics. Am J Audiol, 22(1), 175-178.