OBJECTIVE: This study measured the performance of normal-hearing listeners on the Repeat-Recall Test (RRT) in two noise types (2-talker babble [2TBN] and continuous speech-shaped noise [SSN]) by two noise azimuths (0° and 180°) configurations at signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of 0, 5, 10, and 15 dB and quiet. DESIGN: Within-subject repeated measures. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-one listeners with normal hearing who also passed cognitive screening were tested in the sound-field with the speech stimulus presented from 0° at 75 dB SPL in 4 noise configurations. The order of SNRs, noise configurations, and RRT topic conditions was counterbalanced across listeners. RESULTS: Analysis revealed that repeat scores were significantly better for 2TBN, for noise at 180°, and for high context (HC) sentences. Recall performance was significantly better for SSN and HC sentences. Listening effort ratings were higher for SSN and for noise front condition at SNR ≤ 10 dB. The 2TBN noise was tolerated longer than SSN. Performance on all measures improved with SNRs. CONCLUSIONS: These data showed performance differences among noise configurations and provided a preliminary basis for comparison with hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the RRT.
OBJECTIVE: This study measured the performance of normal-hearing listeners on the Repeat-Recall Test (RRT) in two noise types (2-talker babble [2TBN] and continuous speech-shaped noise [SSN]) by two noise azimuths (0° and 180°) configurations at signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of 0, 5, 10, and 15 dB and quiet. DESIGN: Within-subject repeated measures. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-one listeners with normal hearing who also passed cognitive screening were tested in the sound-field with the speech stimulus presented from 0° at 75 dB SPL in 4 noise configurations. The order of SNRs, noise configurations, and RRT topic conditions was counterbalanced across listeners. RESULTS: Analysis revealed that repeat scores were significantly better for 2TBN, for noise at 180°, and for high context (HC) sentences. Recall performance was significantly better for SSN and HC sentences. Listening effort ratings were higher for SSN and for noise front condition at SNR ≤ 10 dB. The 2TBN noise was tolerated longer than SSN. Performance on all measures improved with SNRs. CONCLUSIONS: These data showed performance differences among noise configurations and provided a preliminary basis for comparison with hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the RRT.