OBJECTIVE: We investigated if linguistic complexity contributes to the variation of the speech reception threshold in noise (SRTN) and thus should be employed as an additional design criterion in sentence tests used for audiometry. DESIGN: Three test lists were established with sentences from the Göttingen sentence test ( Kollmeier & Wesselkamp, 1997 ). One list contained linguistically simple sentences, the other two lists contained sentences with two types of linguistic complexity. For each listener the SRTN was determined for each list. STUDY SAMPLE: Younger and older listeners with normal hearing and older listeners with hearing impairment were tested. RESULTS: Younger listeners with normal hearing showed significantly worse SRTNs on the complex lists than on the simple list. This difference could not be found for either of the older groups. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of linguistic complexity on speech recognition seems to depend on age and/or hearing status. Hence, pending further research, linguistic complexity seems less relevant as a sentence test design criterion for clinical-audiological purposes, but we argue that a test with larger variation in linguistic complexity across sentences might show a relation between linguistic complexity and speech recognition even in a clinical population.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated if linguistic complexity contributes to the variation of the speech reception threshold in noise (SRTN) and thus should be employed as an additional design criterion in sentence tests used for audiometry. DESIGN: Three test lists were established with sentences from the Göttingen sentence test ( Kollmeier & Wesselkamp, 1997 ). One list contained linguistically simple sentences, the other two lists contained sentences with two types of linguistic complexity. For each listener the SRTN was determined for each list. STUDY SAMPLE: Younger and older listeners with normal hearing and older listeners with hearing impairment were tested. RESULTS: Younger listeners with normal hearing showed significantly worse SRTNs on the complex lists than on the simple list. This difference could not be found for either of the older groups. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of linguistic complexity on speech recognition seems to depend on age and/or hearing status. Hence, pending further research, linguistic complexity seems less relevant as a sentence test design criterion for clinical-audiological purposes, but we argue that a test with larger variation in linguistic complexity across sentences might show a relation between linguistic complexity and speech recognition even in a clinical population.