Literature DB >> 7217523

Predicting consonant confusions from acoustic analysis.

J R Dubno, H Levitt.   

Abstract

Acoustic measurements of nonsense syllables in quiet and in noise were used to predict the pattern of consonant confusions made under those conditions. Eleven sets of nonsense syllables were presented to normal-hearing subjects in quiet and at a +5 dB speech-to-noise ratio, at five speech levels. A set of acoustic characteristics of the speech stimuli were chosen for analysis and measured using digital processing techniques. Results of the recognition task revealed significant effects of consonant voicing, position and vowel context on syllable recognition. The performance-intensity function of the quiet condition rises more steeply than the function obtained in noise. The effect of noise on consonant recognition is dependent upon the manner in which the consonant is produced, and the location of maximum constriction. Differences in the absolute values of the acoustic parameters of syllable pairs were used to predict their percentage of confusion. A set of acoustic variables was isolated which was found to be the best predictor of confusion percentages. Although the sets of acoustic variables were different for various syllable types and test conditions, three variables (consonant energy, consonant spectral peaks, consonant-to-noise ratio) were used in a majority of the predictions.

Mesh:

Year:  1981        PMID: 7217523     DOI: 10.1121/1.385345

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  16 in total

1.  The influence of stop consonants' perceptual features on the Articulation Index model.

Authors:  Riya Singh; Jont B Allen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  New perspectives on assessing amplification effects.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Kelly L Tremblay
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-09

3.  Children's recognition of American English consonants in noise.

Authors:  Kanae Nishi; Dawna E Lewis; Brenda M Hoover; Sangsook Choi; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Forward and Backward Masking of Consonants in School-Age Children and Adults.

Authors:  Heather L Porter; Emily R Spitzer; Emily Buss; Lori J Leibold; John H Grose
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Cortical activity patterns predict robust speech discrimination ability in noise.

Authors:  Jai A Shetake; Jordan T Wolf; Ryan J Cheung; Crystal T Engineer; Satyananda K Ram; Michael P Kilgard
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 3.386

6.  Older adult recognition error patterns when listening to interrupted speech and speech in steady-state noise.

Authors:  Kimberly G Smith; Daniel Fogerty
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Effects of low-pass filtering on the perception of word-final plurality markers in children and adults with normal hearing.

Authors:  Lori J Leibold; Hannah Hodson; Ryan W McCreery; Lauren Calandruccio; Emily Buss
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.493

8.  Roles of voice onset time and F0 in stop consonant voicing perception: effects of masking noise and low-pass filtering.

Authors:  Matthew B Winn; Monita Chatterjee; William J Idsardi
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Children's identification of consonants in a speech-shaped noise or a two-talker masker.

Authors:  Lori J Leibold; Emily Buss
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.