Literature DB >> 19894835

Effects of source-to-listener distance and masking on perception of cochlear implant processed speech in reverberant rooms.

Nathaniel A Whitmal1, Sarah F Poissant.   

Abstract

Two experiments examined the effects of source-to-listener distance (SLD) on sentence recognition in simulations of cochlear implant usage in noisy, reverberant rooms. Experiment 1 tested sentence recognition for three locations in the reverberant field of a small classroom (volume=79.2 m(3)). Subjects listened to sentences mixed with speech-spectrum noise that were processed with simulated reverberation followed by either vocoding (6, 12, or 24 spectral channels) or no further processing. Results indicated that changes in SLD within a small room produced only minor changes in recognition performance, a finding likely related to the listener remaining in the reverberant field. Experiment 2 tested sentence recognition for a simulated six-channel implant in a larger classroom (volume=175.9 m(3)) with varying levels of reverberation that could place the three listening locations in either the direct or reverberant field of the room. Results indicated that reducing SLD did improve performance, particularly when direct sound dominated the signal, but did not completely eliminate the effects of reverberation. Scores for both experiments were predicted accurately from speech transmission index values that modeled the effects of SLD, reverberation, and noise in terms of their effects on modulations of the speech envelope. Such models may prove to be a useful predictive tool for evaluating the quality of listening environments for cochlear implant users.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19894835      PMCID: PMC2787074          DOI: 10.1121/1.3216912

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


  46 in total

1.  Predicting speech metrics in a simulated classroom with varied sound absorption.

Authors:  S R Bistafa; J S Bradley
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition by nucleus-22 cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Q J Fu; R V Shannon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A method to determine the speech transmission index from speech waveforms.

Authors:  K L Payton; L D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Adaptive dynamic range optimization for cochlear implants: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Chris J James; Peter J Blamey; Lois Martin; Brett Swanson; Yvette Just; David Macfarlane
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants.

Authors:  L M Friesen; R V Shannon; D Baskent; X Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings.

Authors:  Chris J James; Margaret W Skinner; Lois F A Martin; Laura K Holden; Karyn L Galvin; Timothy A Holden; Lesley Whitford
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Effects of reverberation on perceptual segregation of competing voices.

Authors:  John F Culling; Kathryn I Hodder; Chaz Yee Toh
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  On the importance of early reflections for speech in rooms.

Authors:  J S Bradley; H Sato; M Picard
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers.

Authors:  Michael K Qin; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Gail S Donaldson; Shanna L Allen
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  7 in total

1.  Evaluation of a spectral subtraction strategy to suppress reverberant energy in cochlear implant devices.

Authors:  Kostas Kokkinakis; Christina Runge; Qudsia Tahmina; Yi Hu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Reverberation suppression in cochlear implants using a blind channel-selection strategy.

Authors:  Oldooz Hazrati; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The impact of reverberant self-masking and overlap-masking effects on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners (L).

Authors:  Kostas Kokkinakis; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  A channel-selection criterion for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Kostas Kokkinakis; Oldooz Hazrati; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Use of amplitude modulation cues recovered from frequency modulation for cochlear implant users when original speech cues are severely degraded.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Hyun Joon Shim; Christian Lorenzi; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-02-15

6.  The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Oldooz Hazrati; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Speech Intelligibility and Spatial Release From Masking Improvements Using Spatial Noise Reduction Algorithms in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Ayham Zedan; Tim Jürgens; Ben Williges; Birger Kollmeier; Konstantin Wiebe; Julio Galindo; Thomas Wesarg
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.