Literature DB >> 22501084

Sentence recognition in noise promoting or suppressing masking release by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Bomjun J Kwon1, Trevor T Perry, Cassie L Wilhelm, Eric W Healy.   

Abstract

Normal-hearing (NH) listeners maintain robust speech understanding in modulated noise by "glimpsing" portions of speech from a partially masked waveform--a phenomenon known as masking release (MR). Cochlear implant (CI) users, however, generally lack such resiliency. In previous studies, temporal masking of speech by noise occurred randomly, obscuring to what degree MR is attributable to the temporal overlap of speech and masker. In the present study, masker conditions were constructed to either promote (+MR) or suppress (-MR) masking release by controlling the degree of temporal overlap. Sentence recognition was measured in 14 CI subjects and 22 young-adult NH subjects. Normal-hearing subjects showed large amounts of masking release in the +MR condition and a marked difference between +MR and -MR conditions. In contrast, CI subjects demonstrated less effect of MR overall, and some displayed modulation interference as reflected by poorer performance in modulated maskers. These results suggest that the poor performance of typical CI users in noise might be accounted for by factors that extend beyond peripheral masking, such as reduced segmental boundaries between syllables or words. Encouragingly, the best CI users tested here could take advantage of masker fluctuations to better segregate the speech from the background.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22501084      PMCID: PMC3339508          DOI: 10.1121/1.3688511

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


  32 in total

1.  Psychophysical recovery from single-pulse forward masking in electric hearing.

Authors:  D A Nelson; G S Donaldson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Consonant identification under maskers with sinusoidal modulation: masking release or modulation interference?

Authors:  B J Kwon; C W Turner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Recovery from prior stimulation: masking of speech by interrupted noise for younger and older adults with normal hearing.

Authors:  Judy R Dubno; Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Understanding speech in modulated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Peggy B Nelson; Su-Hyun Jin; Arlene Earley Carney; David A Nelson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers.

Authors:  Ginger S Stickney; Fan-Gang Zeng; Ruth Litovsky; Peter Assmann
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Comparisons of frequency selectivity in simultaneous and forward masking for subjects with unilateral cochlear impairments.

Authors:  B C Moore; B R Glasberg
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics.

Authors:  H Levitt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Influence of pulsed masking on the threshold for spondees.

Authors:  R H Wilson; R Carhart
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1969-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  A "rationalized" arcsine transform.

Authors:  G A Studebaker
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1985-09

10.  Gap detection and masking in hearing-impaired and normal-hearing subjects.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore; S P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  8 in total

1.  Correlations Between Pitch and Phoneme Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Their Normal Hearing Peers.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-15

2.  Dual-carrier processing to convey temporal fine structure cues: Implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Frédéric Apoux; Carla L Youngdahl; Sarah E Yoho; Eric W Healy
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Amplitude fluctuations in a masker influence lexical segmentation in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Trevor T Perry; Bomjun J Kwon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Exploring the Relationship Between Working Memory, Compressor Speed, and Background Noise Characteristics.

Authors:  Barbara Ohlenforst; Pamela E Souza; Ewen N MacDonald
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Evidence for independent time-unit processing of speech using noise promoting or suppressing masking release (L).

Authors:  Eric W Healy; Carla L Youngdahl; Frédéric Apoux
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Speech masking release in Hybrid cochlear implant users: Roles of spectral and temporal cues in electric-acoustic hearing.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Using Auditory Characteristics to Select Hearing Aid Compression Speeds for Presbycusic Patients.

Authors:  Yi Zhang; Jing Chen; Yanmei Zhang; Baoxuan Sun; Yuhe Liu
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 5.702

8.  Using Zebra-speech to study sequential and simultaneous speech segregation in a cochlear-implant simulation.

Authors:  Etienne Gaudrain; Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.840

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.