Literature DB >> 33197359

Comparing Speech Recognition for Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing: Simulations for Controlling Differences in Speech Levels and Spectral Shape.

Daniel Fogerty1, Rachel Madorskiy2, Jayne B Ahlstrom3, Judy R Dubno3.   

Abstract

Purpose This study investigated methods used to simulate factors associated with reduced audibility, increased speech levels, and spectral shaping for aided older adults with hearing loss. Simulations provided to younger normal-hearing adults were used to investigate the effect of sensation level, speech presentation level, and spectral shape in comparison to older adults with hearing loss. Method Measures were assessed in quiet, steady-state noise, and speech-modulated noise. Older adults with hearing loss listened to speech that was spectrally shaped according to their hearing thresholds. Younger adults with normal hearing listened to speech that simulated the hearing-impaired group's (a) reduced audibility, (b) increased speech levels, and (c) spectral shaping. Group comparisons were made based on speech recognition performance and masking release. Additionally, younger adults completed measures of listening effort and perceived speech quality to assess if differences across simulations in these outcome measures were similar to those for speech recognition. Results Across the various simulations employed, testing in the presence of a threshold matching noise best matched differences in speech recognition and masking release between younger and older adults. This result remained consistent across the other two outcome measures. Conclusions A combination of audibility, speech level, and spectral shape factors is required to simulate differences between listeners with normal and impaired hearing in recognition, listening effort, and perceived speech quality. The use of spectrally shaped and amplified speech in the presence of threshold matching noise best provided this simulated control. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13224632.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33197359      PMCID: PMC8608154          DOI: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00246

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


  26 in total

1.  Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification.

Authors:  K T Boike; P E Souza
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels.

Authors:  G A Studebaker; R L Sherbecoe; D M McDaniel; C A Gwaltney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Speech and music quality ratings for linear and nonlinear hearing aid circuitry.

Authors:  Evelyn Davies-Venn; Pamela Souza; David Fabry
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.

Authors:  Franz Faul; Edgar Erdfelder; Albert-Georg Lang; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-05

Review 5.  Understanding the speech-understanding problems of older adults.

Authors:  Larry E Humes
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 1.493

6.  A procedure for quantifying the effects of noise on speech recognition.

Authors:  D D Dirks; D E Morgan; J R Dubno
Journal:  J Speech Hear Disord       Date:  1982-05

7.  Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.

Authors:  Daniel Fogerty; Jayne B Ahlstrom; William J Bologna; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Glimpsing Speech in the Presence of Nonsimultaneous Amplitude Modulations From a Competing Talker: Effect of Modulation Rate, Age, and Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Daniel Fogerty; Jayne B Ahlstrom; William J Bologna; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Gap detection and masking in hearing-impaired and normal-hearing subjects.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore; S P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Equivalence Tests: A Practical Primer for t Tests, Correlations, and Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Daniël Lakens
Journal:  Soc Psychol Personal Sci       Date:  2017-05-05
View more
  3 in total

1.  Glimpsing keywords across sentences in noise: A microstructural analysis of acoustic, lexical, and listener factors.

Authors:  Daniel Fogerty; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 2.482

2.  Phonological and semantic similarity of misperceived words in babble: Effects of sentence context, age, and hearing loss.

Authors:  Blythe Vickery; Daniel Fogerty; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effects of Age on Cortical Tracking of Word-Level Features of Continuous Competing Speech.

Authors:  Juraj Mesik; Lucia Ray; Magdalena Wojtczak
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.677

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.