Literature DB >> 23636210

Spectrotemporal modulation sensitivity as a predictor of speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners.

Joshua G W Bernstein1, Golbarg Mehraei, Shihab Shamma, Frederick J Gallun, Sarah M Theodoroff, Marjorie R Leek.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A model that can accurately predict speech intelligibility for a given hearing-impaired (HI) listener would be an important tool for hearing-aid fitting or hearing-aid algorithm development. Existing speech-intelligibility models do not incorporate variability in suprathreshold deficits that are not well predicted by classical audiometric measures. One possible approach to the incorporation of such deficits is to base intelligibility predictions on sensitivity to simultaneously spectrally and temporally modulated signals.
PURPOSE: The likelihood of success of this approach was evaluated by comparing estimates of spectrotemporal modulation (STM) sensitivity to speech intelligibility and to psychoacoustic estimates of frequency selectivity and temporal fine-structure (TFS) sensitivity across a group of HI listeners. RESEARCH
DESIGN: The minimum modulation depth required to detect STM applied to an 86 dB SPL four-octave noise carrier was measured for combinations of temporal modulation rate (4, 12, or 32 Hz) and spectral modulation density (0.5, 1, 2, or 4 cycles/octave). STM sensitivity estimates for individual HI listeners were compared to estimates of frequency selectivity (measured using the notched-noise method at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz), TFS processing ability (2 Hz frequency-modulation detection thresholds for 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz carriers) and sentence intelligibility in noise (at a 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio) that were measured for the same listeners in a separate study. STUDY SAMPLE: Eight normal-hearing (NH) listeners and 12 listeners with a diagnosis of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss participated. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: STM sensitivity was compared between NH and HI listener groups using a repeated-measures analysis of variance. A stepwise regression analysis compared STM sensitivity for individual HI listeners to audiometric thresholds, age, and measures of frequency selectivity and TFS processing ability. A second stepwise regression analysis compared speech intelligibility to STM sensitivity and the audiogram-based Speech Intelligibility Index.
RESULTS: STM detection thresholds were elevated for the HI listeners, but only for low rates and high densities. STM sensitivity for individual HI listeners was well predicted by a combination of estimates of frequency selectivity at 4000 Hz and TFS sensitivity at 500 Hz but was unrelated to audiometric thresholds. STM sensitivity accounted for an additional 40% of the variance in speech intelligibility beyond the 40% accounted for by the audibility-based Speech Intelligibility Index.
CONCLUSIONS: Impaired STM sensitivity likely results from a combination of a reduced ability to resolve spectral peaks and a reduced ability to use TFS information to follow spectral-peak movements. Combining STM sensitivity estimates with audiometric threshold measures for individual HI listeners provided a more accurate prediction of speech intelligibility than audiometric measures alone. These results suggest a significant likelihood of success for an STM-based model of speech intelligibility for HI listeners. American Academy of Audiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23636210      PMCID: PMC3973426          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.24.4.5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  51 in total

1.  Spectro-temporal modulation transfer functions and speech intelligibility.

Authors:  T Chi; Y Gao; M C Guyton; P Ru; S Shamma
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Inter-relationship between different psychoacoustic measures assumed to be related to the cochlear active mechanism.

Authors:  B C Moore; D A Vickers; C J Plack; A J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.

Authors:  D Byrne; H Dillon; T Ching; R Katsch; G Keidser
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Frequency selectivity as a function of level and frequency measured with uniformly exciting notched noise.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.

Authors:  G Keidser; F Grant
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  The importance of temporal fine structure information in speech at different spectral regions for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects.

Authors:  Kathryn Hopkins; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  D A Nelson; A C Schroder; M Wojtczak
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Temporal modulation transfer functions obtained using sinusoidal carriers with normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  B C Moore; B R Glasberg
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Envelope coding in auditory nerve fibers following noise-induced hearing loss.

Authors:  Sushrut Kale; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-06-16

10.  Suprathreshold auditory processing and speech perception in noise: hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Van Summers; Matthew J Makashay; Sarah M Theodoroff; Marjorie R Leek
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.664

View more
  44 in total

1.  Use of a glimpsing model to understand the performance of listeners with and without hearing loss in spatialized speech mixtures.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Christine R Mason; Jayaganesh Swaminathan; Elin Roverud; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Spectrotemporal modulation sensitivity for hearing-impaired listeners: dependence on carrier center frequency and the relationship to speech intelligibility.

Authors:  Golbarg Mehraei; Frederick J Gallun; Marjorie R Leek; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Determining the energetic and informational components of speech-on-speech masking in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Christine R Mason; Virginia Best; Elin Roverud; Jayaganesh Swaminathan; Todd Jennings; Kameron Clayton; H Steven Colburn
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The fluctuating masker benefit for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners with equal audibility at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio.

Authors:  Kenneth Kragh Jensen; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 5.  The Physiologic and Psychophysical Consequences of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Eric Hoover
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26

6.  Speech Perception with Spectrally Non-overlapping Maskers as Measure of Spectral Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Erin R O'Neill; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-11-19

7.  Relating working memory to compression parameters in clinically fit hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Lynn Sirow
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.493

8.  Auditory "bubbles": Efficient classification of the spectrotemporal modulations essential for speech intelligibility.

Authors:  Jonathan H Venezia; Gregory Hickok; Virginia M Richards
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Individual sensitivity to spectral and temporal cues in listeners with hearing impairment.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Richard A Wright; Michael C Blackburn; Rachael Tatman; Frederick J Gallun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  Distribution of spectral modulation transfer functions in a young, normal-hearing population.

Authors:  Eric C Hoover; Ann C Eddins; David A Eddins
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.