Literature DB >> 17297804

Effects of masking noise on vowel and sibilant contrasts in normal-hearing speakers and postlingually deafened cochlear implant users.

Joseph S Perkell1, Margaret Denny, Harlan Lane, Frank Guenther, Melanie L Matthies, Mark Tiede, Jennell Vick, Majid Zandipour, Ellen Burton.   

Abstract

The role of auditory feedback in speech production was investigated by examining speakers' phonemic contrasts produced under increases in the noise to signal ratio (N/S). Seven cochlear implant users and seven normal-hearing controls pronounced utterances containing the vowels /i/, /u/, /e/ and /ae/ and the sibilants /s/ and /I/ while hearing their speech mixed with noise at seven equally spaced levels between their thresholds of detection and discomfort. Speakers' average vowel duration and SPL generally rose with increasing N/S. Average vowel contrast was initially flat or rising; at higher N/S levels, it fell. A contrast increase is interpreted as reflecting speakers' attempts to maintain clarity under degraded acoustic transmission conditions. As N/S increased, speakers could detect the extent of their phonemic contrasts less effectively, and the competing influence of economy of effort led to contrast decrements. The sibilant contrast was more vulnerable to noise; it decreased over the entire range of increasing N/S for controls and was variable for implant users. The results are interpreted as reflecting the combined influences of a clarity constraint, economy of effort and the effect of masking on achieving auditory phonemic goals-with implant users less able to increase contrasts in noise than controls.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17297804     DOI: 10.1121/1.2384848

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


  14 in total

1.  Movement goals and feedback and feedforward control mechanisms in speech production.

Authors:  Joseph S Perkell
Journal:  J Neurolinguistics       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 1.710

2.  Adaptive auditory feedback control of the production of formant trajectories in the Mandarin triphthong /iau/ and its pattern of generalization.

Authors:  Shanqing Cai; Satrajit S Ghosh; Frank H Guenther; Joseph S Perkell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The role of vowel perceptual cues in compensatory responses to perturbations of speech auditory feedback.

Authors:  Kevin J Reilly; Kathleen E Dougherty
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of real-time cochlear implant simulation on speech production.

Authors:  Elizabeth D Casserly
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Contributions of Auditory and Somatosensory Feedback to Vocal Motor Control.

Authors:  Dante J Smith; Cara Stepp; Frank H Guenther; Elaine Kearney
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Kinematic Analysis of Speech Sound Sequencing Errors Induced by Delayed Auditory Feedback.

Authors:  Gabriel J Cler; Jackson C Lee; Talia Mittelman; Cara E Stepp; Jason W Bohland
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Feedforward and feedback control in apraxia of speech: effects of noise masking on vowel production.

Authors:  Edwin Maas; Marja-Liisa Mailend; Frank H Guenther
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Vowel generalization and its relation to adaptation during perturbations of auditory feedback.

Authors:  Kevin J Reilly; Chelsea Pettibone
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Vowel and Sibilant Production in Noise: Effects of Noise Frequency and Phonological Similarity.

Authors:  Kevin J Reilly
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  An investigation of the relation between sibilant production and somatosensory and auditory acuity.

Authors:  Satrajit S Ghosh; Melanie L Matthies; Edwin Maas; Alexandra Hanson; Mark Tiede; Lucie Ménard; Frank H Guenther; Harlan Lane; Joseph S Perkell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.