Literature DB >> 23785188

Exploring the limits of frequency lowering.

Pamela E Souza1, Kathryn H Arehart, James M Kates, Naomi B H Croghan, Namita Gehani.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study examined how frequency lowering affected sentence intelligibility and quality for adults with postlingually acquired, mild-to-moderate hearing loss.
METHOD: Listeners included adults aged 60-92 years with sloping sensorineural hearing loss and a control group of similarly aged adults with normal hearing. Sentences were presented in quiet and babble at a range of signal-to-noise ratios. Intelligibility and quality were measured with varying amounts of frequency lowering, implemented using a form of frequency compression.
RESULTS: Moderate amounts of compression, particularly with high cutoff frequencies, had minimal effects on sentence intelligibility. Listeners with the greatest high-frequency hearing loss showed the greatest benefit. Sentence intelligibility decreased with more compression. Listeners were more affected by a given set of parameters in noise than in quiet. In quiet, any amount of compression resulted in lower speech quality for most listeners, with the greatest degradation for listeners with better high-frequency hearing. Quality ratings were lower with background noise, and in noise, the effect of changing compression parameters was small.
CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of frequency lowering in adults were affected by the compression parameters as well as individual hearing thresholds. The data are consistent with the idea that frequency lowering can be viewed in terms of improved audibility versus increased distortion trade-off.

Entities:  

Keywords:  amplification or hearing aids; frequency lowering; hearing; hearing loss; intelligibility; noise; quality

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23785188      PMCID: PMC3796181          DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2013/12-0151)

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  43 in total

1.  Aided perception of /s/ and /z/ by hearing-impaired children.

Authors:  Patricia G Stelmachowicz; Andrea L Pittman; Brenda M Hoover; Dawna E Lewis
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 2.  Effects of aging on auditory processing of speech.

Authors:  M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.117

3.  Quantifying the effect of compression hearing aid release time on speech acoustics and intelligibility.

Authors:  Lorienne M Jenstad; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Sound quality judgements of new hearing instrument users over a 24-week post-fitting period.

Authors:  Kevin J Munro; Mark E Lutman
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST).

Authors:  R M Cox; G C Alexander; C Gilmore
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Consequences of broad auditory filters for identification of multichannel-compressed vowels.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Richard Wright; Stephanie Bor
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2011-12-29       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Rejection of hearing aids: attitudes of a geriatric sample.

Authors:  J R Franks; N J Beckmann
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1985 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Long-term effects of non-linear frequency compression for children with moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Jace Wolfe; Andrew John; Erin Schafer; Myriel Nyffeler; Michael Boretzki; Teresa Caraway; Mary Hudson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 2.117

9.  Preference judgments of artificial processed and hearing-aid transduced speech.

Authors:  N J Versfeld; J M Festen; T Houtgast
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Spectral characteristics of speech at the ear: implications for amplification in children.

Authors:  Andrea L Pittman; Patricia G Stelmachowicz; Dawna E Lewis; Brenda M Hoover
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.297

View more
  24 in total

1.  Comparing the information conveyed by envelope modulation for speech intelligibility, speech quality, and music quality.

Authors:  James M Kates; Kathryn H Arehart
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  The Use of Frequency Lowering Technology in the Treatment of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss: A Review of the Literature and Candidacy Considerations for Clinical Application.

Authors:  Danielle Glista; Susan Scollie
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26

3.  Nonlinear frequency compression: Influence of start frequency and input bandwidth on consonant and vowel recognition.

Authors:  Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Quantifying the Range of Signal Modification in Clinically Fit Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Varsha Rallapalli; Melinda Anderson; James Kates; Lauren Balmert; Lynn Sirow; Kathryn Arehart; Pamela Souza
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Understanding Variability in Individual Response to Hearing Aid Signal Processing in Wearable Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Kathryn Arehart; Tim Schoof; Melinda Anderson; Dorina Strori; Lauren Balmert
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Brenda Hoover; Joshua Alexander; Dawna Lewis; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

7.  The effects of frequency lowering on speech perception in noise with adult hearing-aid users.

Authors:  Christi W Miller; Emily Bates; Marc Brennan
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 2.117

8.  Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Dawna Lewis; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Extended High-Frequency Bandwidth Improves Speech Reception in the Presence of Spatially Separated Masking Speech.

Authors:  Suzanne Carr Levy; Daniel J Freed; Michael Nilsson; Brian C J Moore; Sunil Puria
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Listener Performance with a Novel Hearing Aid Frequency Lowering Technique.

Authors:  Benjamin J Kirby; Judy G Kopun; Meredith Spratford; Clairissa M Mollak; Marc A Brennan; Ryan W McCreery
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.664

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.