Literature DB >> 12083221

Evaluation of context effects in sentence recognition.

Adelbert W Bronkhorst1, Thomas Brand, Kirsten Wagener.   

Abstract

It was investigated whether the model for context effects, developed earlier by Bronkhorst et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93, 499-509 (1993)], can be applied to results of sentence tests, used for the evaluation of speech recognition. Data for two German sentence tests, that differed with respect to their semantic content, were analyzed. They had been obtained from normal-hearing listeners using adaptive paradigms in which the signal-to-noise ratio was varied. It appeared that the model can accurately reproduce the complete pattern of scores as a function of signal-to-noise ratio: both sentence recognition scores and proportions of incomplete responses. In addition, it is shown that the model can provide a better account of the relationship between average word recognition probability (p(e)) and sentence recognition probability (p(w)) than the relationship p(w) =p(e)j, which has been used in previous studies. Analysis of the relationship between j and the model parameters shows that j is, nevertheless, a very useful parameter, especially when it is combined with the parameter j', which can be derived using the equivalent relationship p(w,0) = (1 - p(e))(j'), where p(w,0) is the probability of recognizing none of the words in the sentence. These parameters not only provide complementary information on context effects present in the speech material, but they also can be used to estimate the model parameters. Because the model can be applied to both speech and printed text, an experiment was conducted in which part of the sentences was presented orthographically with 1-3 missing words. The results revealed a large difference between the values of the model parameters for the two presentation modes. This is probably due to the fact that, with speech, subjects can reduce the number of alternatives for a certain word using partial information that they have perceived (i.e., not only using the sentence context). A method for mapping model parameters from one mode to the other is suggested, but the validity of this approach has to be confirmed with additional data.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12083221     DOI: 10.1121/1.1458025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  13 in total

1.  The effects of syntactic complexity on processing sentences in noise.

Authors:  Rebecca Carroll; Esther Ruigendijk
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2013-04

2.  The effect of speech material on the band importance function for Mandarin Chinese.

Authors:  Yufan Du; Yi Shen; Xihong Wu; Jing Chen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Syllable-constituent perception by hearing-aid users: Common factors in quiet and noise.

Authors:  James D Miller; Charles S Watson; Marjorie R Leek; Judy R Dubno; David J Wark; Pamela E Souza; Sandra Gordon-Salant; Jayne B Ahlstrom
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  [The systematic selection of speech audiometric procedures].

Authors:  T Steffens
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Evaluation of Speech-Perception Training for Hearing Aid Users: A Multisite Study in Progress.

Authors:  James D Miller; Charles S Watson; Judy R Dubno; Marjorie R Leek
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2015-11

6.  Development of the Everyday Conversational Sentences in Noise test.

Authors:  Kelly M Miles; Gitte Keidser; Katrina Freeston; Timothy Beechey; Virginia Best; Jörg M Buchholz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Sentence perception in noise by hearing-aid users predicted by syllable-constituent perception and the use of context.

Authors:  James D Miller; Charles S Watson; Marjorie R Leek; David J Wark; Pamela E Souza; Sandra Gordon-Salant; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Simultaneous and forward masking of vowels and stop consonants: Effects of age, hearing loss, and spectral shaping.

Authors:  Daniel Fogerty; William J Bologna; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Within-consonant perceptual differences in the hearing impaired ear.

Authors:  Andrea Trevino; Jont B Allen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  The cocktail-party problem revisited: early processing and selection of multi-talker speech.

Authors:  Adelbert W Bronkhorst
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.