Literature DB >> 2317599

A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use.

A MacLeod1, Q Summerfield.   

Abstract

The strategy for measuring speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise advocated by Plomp and Mimpen (Audiology, 18, 43-52, 1979) was modified to create a reliable test for measuring the difficulty which listeners have in speech reception, both auditorily and audio-visually. The test materials consist of 10 lists of 15 short sentences of homogeneous intelligibility when presented acoustically, and of different, but still homogeneous, intelligibility when presented audio-visually, in white noise. Homogeneity was achieved by applying phonetic and linguistic principles at the stage of compilation, followed by pilot testing and balancing of properties. To run the test, lists are presented at signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) determined by an up-down psychophysical rule so as to estimate auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds, defined as the SNRs at which the three content words in each sentence are identified correctly on 50% of trials. These thresholds provide measures of a subject's speech-reception abilities. The difference between them provides a measure of the benefit received from vision. It is shown that this measure is closely related to the accuracy with which subjects lip-read words in sentences with no acoustical information. In data from normally hearing adults, the standard deviations (s.d.s) of estimates of auditory speech reception threshold in noise (SRTN), audio-visual SRTN, and visual benefit are 1.2, 2.0, and 2.3 dB, respectively. Graphs are provided with which to estimate the trade-off between reliability and the number of lists presented, and to assess the significance of deviant scores from individual subjects.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2317599     DOI: 10.3109/03005369009077840

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Audiol        ISSN: 0300-5364


  48 in total

1.  Level discrimination of speech sounds by hearing-impaired individuals with and without hearing amplification.

Authors:  William M Whitmer; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 2.  Comparative studies on hearing aid selection and fitting procedures: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Mick Metselaar; Bert Maat; Hans Verschuure; Wouter A Dreschler; Louw Feenstra
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-10-23       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Testing sensory and multisensory function in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Sarah H Baum; Ryan A Stevenson; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 1.355

4.  Effects of envelope bandwidth on the intelligibility of sine- and noise-vocoded speech.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Stuart Rosen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  The effects of cueing temporal and spatial attention on word recognition in a complex listening task in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Stuart Gatehouse; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2008-06

6.  Time-Compressed Speech Identification Is Predicted by Auditory Neural Processing, Perceptuomotor Speed, and Executive Functioning in Younger and Older Listeners.

Authors:  James W Dias; Carolyn M McClaskey; Kelly C Harris
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-11-19

7.  Spatial Frequency Requirements and Gaze Strategy in Visual-Only and Audiovisual Speech Perception.

Authors:  Amanda H Wilson; Agnès Alsius; Martin Paré; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Experiments on Auditory-Visual Perception of Sentences by Users of Unilateral, Bimodal, and Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Julie Liss; Shuai Wang; Visar Berisha; Cimarron Ludwig; Sarah Cook Natale
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  The effect of hearing-aid compression on judgments of relative distance.

Authors:  Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Lipreading, processing speed, and working memory in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Julia E Feld; Mitchell S Sommers
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.