Literature DB >> 15938067

Double-vowel perception in listeners with cochlear hearing loss: differences in fundamental frequency, ear of presentation, and relative amplitude.

Kathryn Hoberg Arehart1, Jessica Rossi-Katz, Julie Swensson-Prutsman.   

Abstract

This study presents 2 experiments investigating whether listeners with cochlear hearing loss (hearing impaired; HI) and listeners with normal hearing (NH) show differential susceptibility to masking in double-vowel identification. Experiment 1 addressed how double-vowel perception changes as a function of differences in fundamental frequency (deltaF0) of 0 and 2 semitones and the relative amplitudes of the constituent vowels (target-to-masker ratios: -10, -5, 0, 5, 10 dB). When deltaF0 is 0 semitones, listeners in the HI group often perceive the presence of only 1 vowel, whereas listeners in the NH group generally perceive the presence of 2 vowels. In both groups, deltaF0 benefits target-vowel identification, with the greatest benefit occurring when the target-to-masker ratio is -10 dB. When identification rates of specific vowels (in d') were rank ordered, different patterns of vowel dominance were found between the NH and HI groups. In Experiment 2, the effects of deltaF0 (0 to 4 semitones) were compared for monaural and dichotic presentation of double vowels. Both groups show significant dichotic benefit. In addition, individual listeners in the HI group showed trends toward greater dichotic benefit. In both experiments, identification of competing vowels was significantly worse in HI listeners. The results of this study support the idea that increased susceptibility to masking is a primary factor underlying the degraded double-vowel perception in listeners with hearing loss.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15938067     DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2005/017)

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


  19 in total

1.  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

2.  The use of confusion patterns to evaluate the neural basis for concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  An algorithm to increase intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in the presence of a competing talker.

Authors:  Eric W Healy; Masood Delfarah; Jordan L Vasko; Brittney L Carter; DeLiang Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Masking Release for Speech-in-Speech Recognition Due to a Target/Masker Sex Mismatch in Children With Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Lori J Leibold; Jenna M Browning; Emily Buss
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Effects of age and hearing loss on concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Effect of fundamental-frequency and sentence-onset differences on speech-identification performance of young and older adults in a competing-talker background.

Authors:  Jae Hee Lee; Larry E Humes
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Effects of age on concurrent vowel perception in acoustic and simulated electroacoustic hearing.

Authors:  Kathryn H Arehart; Pamela E Souza; Ramesh Kumar Muralimanohar; Christi Wise Miller
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Talker identification: Effects of masking, hearing loss, and age.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Christine R Mason; Elin Roverud; Tyler K Perrachione; Gerald Kidd; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Modeling the level-dependent changes of concurrent vowel scores.

Authors:  Harshavardhan Settibhaktini; Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  Pitch, harmonicity and concurrent sound segregation: psychoacoustical and neurophysiological findings.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-09-27       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.