Literature DB >> 19633563

Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss.

Evelyn Davies-Venn1, Pamela Souza, Marc Brennan, G Christopher Stecker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns.
DESIGN: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level () and NAL-NL (). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns.
RESULTS: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss.
CONCLUSIONS: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19633563      PMCID: PMC2981704          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181aec5bc

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  65 in total

1.  The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids.

Authors:  S Gatehouse
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Consonant perception in quiet: effect of increasing the consonant-vowel ratio with compression amplification.

Authors:  L Hickson; D Byrne
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Moderate cochlear hearing loss leads to a reduced ability to use temporal fine structure information.

Authors:  Kathryn Hopkins; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Acclimatization in wide dynamic range multichannel compression and linear amplification hearing aids.

Authors:  E William Yund; Christina M Roup; Helen J Simon; Glen A Bowman
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug

5.  Effects of compression on speech acoustics, intelligibility, and sound quality.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2002-12

6.  Transfer functions and correction factors used in hearing aid evaluation and research.

Authors:  R A Bentler; C V Pavlovic
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss.

Authors:  A Boothroyd; N Springer; L Smith; J Schulman
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1988-09

8.  Clinical experience with impedance audiometry.

Authors:  J Jerger
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol       Date:  1970-10

9.  Consonant-feature transmission as a function of presentation level in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  H N Gutnick
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Effects of three amplification strategies on speech perception by children with severe and profound hearing loss.

Authors:  Josephine E Marriage; Brian C J Moore; Michael A Stone; Thomas Baer
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults with Severe and Profound Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Laura Turton; Pamela Souza; Linda Thibodeau; Louise Hickson; René Gifford; Judith Bird; Maren Stropahl; Lorraine Gailey; Bernadette Fulton; Nerina Scarinci; Katie Ekberg; Barbra Timmer
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2020-12-16

2.  The role of spectral resolution, working memory, and audibility in explaining variance in susceptibility to temporal envelope distortion.

Authors:  Evelyn Davies-Venn; Pamela Souza
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Individual sensitivity to spectral and temporal cues in listeners with hearing impairment.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Richard A Wright; Michael C Blackburn; Rachael Tatman; Frederick J Gallun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Working memory, age, and hearing loss: susceptibility to hearing aid distortion.

Authors:  Kathryn H Arehart; Pamela Souza; Rosalinda Baca; James M Kates
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Quantifying the Range of Signal Modification in Clinically Fit Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Varsha Rallapalli; Melinda Anderson; James Kates; Lauren Balmert; Lynn Sirow; Kathryn Arehart; Pamela Souza
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Implications of high-frequency cochlear dead regions for fitting hearing aids to adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.

Authors:  Robyn M Cox; Jani A Johnson; Genevieve C Alexander
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Effects of WDRC release time and number of channels on output SNR and speech recognition.

Authors:  Joshua M Alexander; Katie Masterson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  The Characteristics of Adults with Severe Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Eric Hoover; Michael Blackburn; Frederick Gallun
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 9.  An evidence-based systematic review of amplitude compression in hearing aids for school-age children with hearing loss.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Rebecca A Venediktov; Jaumeiko J Coleman; Hillary M Leech
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 1.493

10.  Does the Speech Cue Profile Affect Response to Amplitude Envelope Distortion?

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Gregory Ellis; Kendra Marks; Richard Wright; Frederick Gallun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.