Literature DB >> 17348530

The detection of differences in the cues to distance by elderly hearing-impaired listeners.

Michael A Akeroyd1, Stuart Gatehouse, Julia Blaschke.   

Abstract

This experiment measured the capability of hearing-impaired individuals to discriminate differences in the cues to the distance of spoken sentences. The stimuli were generated synthetically, using a room-image procedure to calculate the direct sound and first 74 reflections for a source placed in a 7 x 9 m room, and then presenting each of those sounds individually through a circular array of 24 loudspeakers. Seventy-seven listeners participated, aged 22-83 years and with hearing levels from -5 to 59 dB HL. In conditions where a substantial change in overall level due to the inverse-square law was available as a cue, the elderly hearing-impaired listeners did not perform any different from control groups. In other conditions where that cue was unavailable (so leaving the direct-to-reverberant relationship as a cue), either because the reverberant field dominated the direct sound or because the overall level had been artificially equalized, hearing-impaired listeners performed worse than controls. There were significant correlations with listeners' self-reported distance capabilities as measured by the "Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing" questionnaire [S. Gatehouse and W. Noble, Int. J. Audiol. 43, 85-99 (2004)]. The results demonstrate that hearing-impaired listeners show deficits in the ability to use some of the cues which signal auditory distance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17348530      PMCID: PMC3563070          DOI: 10.1121/1.2404927

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


  18 in total

1.  The precedence effect.

Authors:  R Y Litovsky; H S Colburn; W A Yost; S J Guzman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Auditory localization of nearby sources. II. Localization of a broadband source.

Authors:  D S Brungart; N I Durlach; W M Rabinowitz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Auditory distance perception in rooms.

Authors:  A W Bronkhorst; T Houtgast
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-02-11       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  An analysis of cues to auditory depth perception in free space.

Authors:  P D COLEMAN
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1963-05       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  Perception of the relative distances of nearby sound sources.

Authors:  D H Ashmead; D LeRoy; R D Odom
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-04

6.  Simulating the response of multiple microphones to a single acoustic source in a reverberant room.

Authors:  P M Peterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise.

Authors:  A MacLeod; Q Summerfield
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  1987-05

8.  Contribution of listeners' approaching motion to auditory distance perception.

Authors:  D H Ashmead; D L Davis; A Northington
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  The role of non-auditory factors in measured and self-reported disability.

Authors:  S Gatehouse
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  1990

10.  The binaural performance of a cross-talk cancellation system with matched or mismatched setup and playback acoustics.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd; John Chambers; David Bullock; Alan R Palmer; A Quentin Summerfield; Philip A Nelson; Stuart Gatehouse
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  20 in total

1.  Level discrimination of speech sounds by hearing-impaired individuals with and without hearing amplification.

Authors:  William M Whitmer; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  The effects of cueing temporal and spatial attention on word recognition in a complex listening task in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Stuart Gatehouse; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2008-06

3.  Evidence for enhanced discrimination of virtual auditory distance among blind listeners using level and direct-to-reverberant cues.

Authors:  Andrew J Kolarik; Silvia Cirstea; Shahina Pardhan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Auditory and visual orienting responses in listeners with and without hearing-impairment.

Authors:  W Owen Brimijoin; David McShefferty; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  The effect of hearing impairment on localization dominance for single-word stimuli.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd; Fiona H Guy
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Stuart Gatehouse: a brief life.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2008-06

7.  The effect of hearing-aid compression on judgments of relative distance.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 8.  Effect of dual sensory loss on auditory localization: implications for intervention.

Authors:  Helen J Simon; Harry Levitt
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-12

9.  An Auditory Illusion of Proximity of the Source Induced by Sonic Crystals.

Authors:  Ignacio Spiousas; Pablo E Etchemendy; Ramiro O Vergara; Esteban R Calcagno; Manuel C Eguia
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  An overview of the major phenomena of the localization of sound sources by normal-hearing, hearing-impaired, and aided listeners.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.