Literature DB >> 30299342

Redundant Information Is Sometimes More Beneficial Than Spatial Information to Understand Speech in Noise.

Benjamin Dieudonné1, Tom Francart.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework to unambiguously define and relate the different spatial effects in speech understanding: head shadow, redundancy, squelch, spatial release from masking (SRM), and so on. Next, to investigate the contribution of interaural time and level differences to these spatial effects in speech understanding and how this is influenced by the type of masking noise.
DESIGN: In our framework, SRM is uniquely characterized as a linear combination of head shadow, binaural redundancy, and binaural squelch. The latter two terms are combined into one binaural term, which we define as binaural contrast: a benefit of interaural differences. In this way, SRM is a simple sum of a monaural and a binaural term. We used the framework to quantify these spatial effects in 10 listeners with normal hearing. The participants performed speech intelligibility tasks in different spatial setups. We used head-related transfer functions to manipulate the presence of interaural time and level differences. We used three spectrally matched masker types: stationary speech-weighted noise, a competing talker, and speech-weighted noise that was modulated with the broadband temporal envelope of the competing talker.
RESULTS: We found that (1) binaural contrast was increased by interaural time differences, but reduced by interaural level differences, irrespective of masker type, and (2) large redundancy (the benefit of having identical information in two ears) could reduce binaural contrast and thus also reduce SRM.
CONCLUSIONS: Our framework yielded new insights in binaural processing in speech intelligibility. First, interaural level differences disturb speech intelligibility in realistic listening conditions. Therefore, to optimize speech intelligibility in hearing aids, it is more beneficial to improve monaural signal-to-noise ratios rather than to preserve interaural level differences. Second, although redundancy is mostly ignored when considering spatial hearing, it might explain reduced SRM in some cases.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 30299342     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000660

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  11 in total

1.  Dichotic listening performance and effort as a function of spectral resolution and interaural symmetry.

Authors:  Kristina DeRoy Milvae; Stefanie E Kuchinsky; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 2.482

2.  Effects of better-ear glimpsing, binaural unmasking, and spectral resolution on spatial release from masking in cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Bobby E Gibbs; Joshua G W Bernstein; Douglas S Brungart; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 2.482

Review 3.  Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf.

Authors:  Sabrina H Pieper; Noura Hamze; Stefan Brill; Sabine Hochmuth; Mats Exter; Marek Polak; Andreas Radeloff; Michael Buschermöhle; Mathias Dietz
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.496

4.  Reducing interaural tonotopic mismatch preserves binaural unmasking in cochlear implant simulations of single-sided deafness.

Authors:  Elad Sagi; Mahan Azadpour; Jonathan Neukam; Nicole Hope Capach; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 2.482

5.  Benefits of triple acoustic beamforming during speech-on-speech masking and sound localization for bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  David Yun; Todd R Jennings; Gerald Kidd; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Head Shadow, Summation, and Squelch in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users With Linked Automatic Gain Controls.

Authors:  Taylor A Bakal; Kristina DeRoy Milvae; Chen Chen; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

7.  Spatial Hearing and Functional Auditory Skills in Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Nicole E Corbin; Emily Buss; Lori J Leibold
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 2.674

8.  Novel Approaches to Measure Spatial Release From Masking in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Z Ellen Peng; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.562

9.  Effect of Masker Head Orientation, Listener Age, and Extended High-Frequency Sensitivity on Speech Recognition in Spatially Separated Speech.

Authors:  Meredith D Braza; Nicole E Corbin; Emily Buss; Brian B Monson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.562

10.  Auditory Attention and Spatial Unmasking in Children With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Sara M Misurelli; Matthew J Goupell; Emily A Burg; Rachael Jocewicz; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.