Literature DB >> 19748564

Fundamental frequency and speech intelligibility in background noise.

Christopher A Brown1, Sid P Bacon.   

Abstract

Speech reception in noise is an especially difficult problem for listeners with hearing impairment as well as for users of cochlear implants (CIs). One likely cause of this is an inability to 'glimpse' a target talker in a fluctuating background, which has been linked to deficits in temporal fine-structure processing. A fine-structure cue that has the potential to be beneficial for speech reception in noise is fundamental frequency (F0). A challenging problem, however, is delivering the cue to these individuals. The benefits to speech intelligibility of F0 for both listeners with hearing impairment and users of CIs are reviewed, as well as various methods of delivering F0 to these listeners.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19748564      PMCID: PMC2885573          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2009.08.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  82 in total

1.  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

2.  Voice gender identification by cochlear implant users: the role of spectral and temporal resolution.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; Sherol Chinchilla; Geraldine Nogaki; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effects of envelope-vocoder processing on F0 discrimination and concurrent-vowel identification.

Authors:  Michael K Qin; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Effects of introducing unprocessed low-frequency information on the reception of envelope-vocoder processed speech.

Authors:  Michael K Qin; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Unintelligible low-frequency sound enhances simulated cochlear-implant speech recognition in noise.

Authors:  Janice E Chang; John Y Bai; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.538

6.  Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users.

Authors:  Dawn Burton Koch; Mark Downing; Mary Joe Osberger; Leonid Litvak
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  The effect of smoothing filter slope and spectral frequency on temporal speech information.

Authors:  Eric W Healy; Heidi M Steinbach
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Frequency discrimination of complex tones by hearing-impaired subjects: Evidence for loss of ability to use temporal fine structure.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Brian R Glasberg; Kathryn Hopkins
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2006-10-06       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Improved speech recognition in noise in simulated binaurally combined acoustic and electric stimulation.

Authors:  Ying-Yee Kong; Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Speech perception problems of the hearing impaired reflect inability to use temporal fine structure.

Authors:  Christian Lorenzi; Gaëtan Gilbert; Héloïse Carn; Stéphane Garnier; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-11-20       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  32 in total

1.  The relative phonetic contributions of a cochlear implant and residual acoustic hearing to bimodal speech perception.

Authors:  Benjamin M Sheffield; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening.

Authors:  Kate Helms Tillery; Christopher A Brown; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Shifting fundamental frequency in simulated electric-acoustic listening.

Authors:  Christopher A Brown; Nicole M Scherrer; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Perception of consonants in reverberation and noise by adults fitted with bimodal devices.

Authors:  Michelle Mason; Kostas Kokkinakis
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Comparing models of the combined-stimulation advantage for speech recognition.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The Effects of Acoustic Bandwidth on Simulated Bimodal Benefit in Children and Adults with Normal Hearing.

Authors:  Sterling W Sheffield; Michelle Simha; Kelly N Jahn; René H Gifford
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Influences of noise-interruption and information-bearing acoustic changes on understanding simulated electric-acoustic speech.

Authors:  Christian Stilp; Gail Donaldson; Soohee Oh; Ying-Yee Kong
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The Effect of Hearing Aid Bandwidth and Configuration of Hearing Loss on Bimodal Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Arlene C Neuman; Annette Zeman; Jonathan Neukam; Binhuan Wang; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Binaural enhancement for bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Christopher A Brown
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  The influence of frequency-dependent hearing loss to unaided APHAB scores.

Authors:  J Löhler; B Akcicek; B Wollenberg; T Kappe; P Schlattmann; R Schönweiler
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.