Literature DB >> 12546495

Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise.

Judy R Dubno1, Jayne B Ahlstrom, Amy R Horwitz.   

Abstract

Speech recognition in noise improves when speech and noise sources are separated in space. This benefit has two components whose effects are strongest in different frequency regions: (1) interaural level differences (e.g., head shadow), which are largest at higher frequencies, and (2) interaural time differences, which have their greatest contribution at lower frequencies. Binaural interactions enhance the separation of signals from noise through the use of these interaural differences. Here, the benefit attributable to spatial separation was measured as a function of the low- and high-pass cutoff frequency of speech and noise. Listeners were younger adults with normal hearing, older adults with normal hearing, and older adults with hearing loss. Binaural thresholds for narrowband noises were measured in quiet and in a speech-shaped masker as a function of masker low-pass cutoff frequency. Speech levels corresponding to 50% correct recognition of sentences from the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) were measured in a 65-dB SPL speech-shaped noise. Thresholds for narrowband noises and for speech were measured with two loudspeaker configurations: (1) signals and speech-shaped noise at 0 degrees azimuth (in front of the listener) and (2) signals at 0 degrees azimuth and speech-shaped noise at 90 degrees azimuth (at the listener's side). The criterion measure was spatial separation benefit, or the difference in thresholds for the two conditions. Benefit of spatial separation for unfiltered speech averaged 6.1 dB for younger listeners with normal hearing, 4.9 dB for older listeners with normal hearing, and 2.7 dB for older listeners with hearing loss. Benefit was differentially affected by low-pass and high-pass filtering, suggesting a trade-off of the contributions of higher frequency interaural level differences and lower frequency interaural timing cues. As expected, older listeners with hearing loss benefited little from the improved signal-to-noise ratios in the higher frequencies resulting from head shadow, but showed some benefit from lower frequency cues. Spatial benefit for older listeners with normal hearing was reduced relative to benefit for younger listeners. This result may be related to older listeners' elevated thresholds at frequencies above 6.0 kHz.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12546495     DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2002/104)

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  20 in total

Review 1.  Problems hearing in noise in older adults: a review of spatial processing disorder.

Authors:  Helen Glyde; Louise Hickson; Sharon Cameron; Harvey Dillon
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-11-08

2.  Stimulus factors influencing spatial release from speech-on-speech masking.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Christine R Mason; Virginia Best; Nicole Marrone
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Spatial release from masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners as a function of the temporal overlap of competing talkers.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The effects of hearing loss and age on the benefit of spatial separation between multiple talkers in reverberant rooms.

Authors:  Nicole Marrone; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening.

Authors:  Jayne B Ahlstrom; Amy R Horwitz; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Effects of simulated spectral holes on speech intelligibility and spatial release from masking under binaural and monaural listening.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Ruth Y Litovsky; Gongqiang Yu; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The influence of non-spatial factors on measures of spatial release from masking.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Nicole Marrone; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Effect of audibility on spatial release from speech-on-speech masking.

Authors:  Helen Glyde; Jörg M Buchholz; Lillian Nielsen; Virginia Best; Harvey Dillon; Sharon Cameron; Louise Hickson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Initial development of a spatially separated speech-in-noise and localization training program.

Authors:  Richard S Tyler; Shelley A Witt; Camille C Dunn; Wenjun Wang
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.664

10.  Spatial unmasking in the echolocating Big Brown Bat, Eptesicus fuscus.

Authors:  Susan Sümer; Annette Denzinger; Hans-Ulrich Schnitzler
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 1.836

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.