Michael A Stone1, Brian C J Moore. 1. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the effects of time delay in a hearing aid on subjective disturbance and reading rates while the user of the aid was speaking, using hearing-impaired subjects and real-time processing. The time delay was constant across frequency. DESIGN: A digital signal processor was programmed as a four-channel, fast-acting, wide-dynamic-range compression hearing aid. One of four delays could be selected on the aid to produce a total delay of 13, 21, 30, or 40 msec between microphone and receiver. Twenty-five subjects, mostly with near-symmetric hearing impairment of cochlear origin, were fitted bilaterally with behind-the-ear aids connected to the processor. The aids were programmed with insertion gains prescribed by the CAMEQ loudness equalization procedure for each subject and ear. Subjects were asked to read aloud from scripts: speech production rates were measured and subjective ratings of the disturbance of the delay were obtained. Subjects required some training to recognize the effects of the delay to rate it consistently. RESULTS: Subjective disturbance increased progressively with increasing delay and was a nonmonotonic function of low-frequency hearing loss. Subjects with mild or severe low-frequency hearing loss were generally less disturbed by the delay than those with moderate loss. Disturbance ratings tended to decrease over successive tests. Word production rates were not significantly affected by delay over the range of delays tested. CONCLUSIONS: The results follow a pattern similar to those presented in , obtained using a simulation of hearing loss and normally hearing subjects, except for the nonmonotonic variation of disturbance with low-frequency hearing loss. We hypothesize that disturbance is maximal when the levels in the ear canal of the low-frequency components are similar for the unaided and aided sounds. A rating of 3, which is probably just acceptable, was obtained for delays ranging from 14 to 30 msec, depending on the hearing loss. Some acclimatization to the subjective disturbance occurred over a time scale of about 1 hour.
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the effects of time delay in a hearing aid on subjective disturbance and reading rates while the user of the aid was speaking, using hearing-impaired subjects and real-time processing. The time delay was constant across frequency. DESIGN: A digital signal processor was programmed as a four-channel, fast-acting, wide-dynamic-range compression hearing aid. One of four delays could be selected on the aid to produce a total delay of 13, 21, 30, or 40 msec between microphone and receiver. Twenty-five subjects, mostly with near-symmetric hearing impairment of cochlear origin, were fitted bilaterally with behind-the-ear aids connected to the processor. The aids were programmed with insertion gains prescribed by the CAMEQ loudness equalization procedure for each subject and ear. Subjects were asked to read aloud from scripts: speech production rates were measured and subjective ratings of the disturbance of the delay were obtained. Subjects required some training to recognize the effects of the delay to rate it consistently. RESULTS: Subjective disturbance increased progressively with increasing delay and was a nonmonotonic function of low-frequency hearing loss. Subjects with mild or severe low-frequency hearing loss were generally less disturbed by the delay than those with moderate loss. Disturbance ratings tended to decrease over successive tests. Word production rates were not significantly affected by delay over the range of delays tested. CONCLUSIONS: The results follow a pattern similar to those presented in , obtained using a simulation of hearing loss and normally hearing subjects, except for the nonmonotonic variation of disturbance with low-frequency hearing loss. We hypothesize that disturbance is maximal when the levels in the ear canal of the low-frequency components are similar for the unaided and aided sounds. A rating of 3, which is probably just acceptable, was obtained for delays ranging from 14 to 30 msec, depending on the hearing loss. Some acclimatization to the subjective disturbance occurred over a time scale of about 1 hour.
Authors: Tobias Goehring; Federico Bolner; Jessica J M Monaghan; Bas van Dijk; Andrzej Zarowski; Stefan Bleeck Journal: Hear Res Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 3.208
Authors: Mahmoud Keshavarzi; Tobias Goehring; Justin Zakis; Richard E Turner; Brian C J Moore Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2018 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293