Literature DB >> 34019777

Does the Speech Cue Profile Affect Response to Amplitude Envelope Distortion?

Pamela E Souza1, Gregory Ellis1, Kendra Marks1, Richard Wright2, Frederick Gallun3.   

Abstract

Purpose A broad area of interest to our group is to understand the consequences of the "cue profile" (a measure of how well a listener can utilize audible temporal and/or spectral cues for listening scenarios in which a subset of cues is distorted. The study goal was to determine if listeners whose cue profile indicated that they primarily used temporal cues for recognition would respond differently to speech-envelope distortion than listeners who utilized both spectral and temporal cues. Method Twenty-five adults with sensorineural hearing loss participated in the study. The listener's cue profile was measured by analyzing identification patterns for a set of synthetic syllables in which envelope rise time and formant transitions were varied. A linear discriminant analysis quantified the relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues to identification patterns. Low-context sentences in noise were processed with time compression, wide-dynamic range compression, or a combination of time compression and wide-dynamic range compression to create a range of speech-envelope distortions. An acoustic metric, a modified version of the Spectral Correlation Index, was calculated to quantify envelope distortion. Results A binomial generalized linear mixed-effects model indicated that envelope distortion, the cue profile, the interaction between envelope distortion and the cue profile, and the pure-tone average were significant predictors of sentence recognition. Conclusions The listeners with good perception of spectro-temporal contrasts were more resilient to the detrimental effects of envelope compression than listeners who used temporal cues to a greater extent. The cue profile may provide information about individual listening that can direct choice of hearing aid parameters, especially those parameters that affect the speech envelope.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34019777      PMCID: PMC8740712          DOI: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00481

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


  85 in total

1.  Dispensing rates of four common hearing aid product features: associations with variations in practice among audiologists.

Authors:  Earl E Johnson; Todd A Ricketts
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-05-10

2.  Temporal fine-structure cues to speech and pure tone modulation in observers with sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall; John H Grose
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  The consonant-weighted envelope difference index (cEDI): a proposed technique for quantifying envelope distortion.

Authors:  Eric C Hoover; Pamela E Souza; Frederick J Gallun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  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

5.  The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment.

Authors:  Ziad S Nasreddine; Natalie A Phillips; Valérie Bédirian; Simon Charbonneau; Victor Whitehead; Isabelle Collin; Jeffrey L Cummings; Howard Chertkow
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.562

6.  Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing.

Authors:  Joshua G W Bernstein; Van Summers; Elena Grassi; Ken W Grant
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.664

7.  Effects of hearing loss and spectral shaping on identification and neural response patterns of stop-consonant stimuli.

Authors:  Ashley W Harkrider; Patrick N Plyler; Mark S Hedrick
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Exploring Hearing Aid Problems: Perspectives of Hearing Aid Owners and Clinicians.

Authors:  Rebecca J Bennett; Ariane Laplante-Lévesque; Carly J Meyer; Robert H Eikelboom
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  The Desired Sensation Level multistage input/output algorithm.

Authors:  Susan Scollie; Richard Seewald; Leonard Cornelisse; Sheila Moodie; Marlene Bagatto; Diana Laurnagaray; Steve Beaulac; John Pumford
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2005

10.  Preferred Compression Speed for Speech and Music and Its Relationship to Sensitivity to Temporal Fine Structure.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Aleksander Sęk
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.