Literature DB >> 8263829

Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: effects on intelligibility, quality, and response times.

T Baer1, B C Moore, S Gatehouse.   

Abstract

This paper describes a series of experiments evaluating the effects of digital processing of speech in noise so as to enhance spectral contrast, using subjects with cochlear hearing loss. The enhancement was carried out on a frequency scale related to the equivalent rectangular bandwidths (ERBs) of auditory filters in normally hearing subjects. The aim was to enhance major spectral prominences without enhancing fine-grain spectral features that would not be resolved by a normal ear. In experiment 1, the amount of enhancement and the bandwidth (in ERBs) of the enhancement processing were systematically varied. Large amounts of enhancement produced decreases in the intelligibility of speech in noise. Performance for moderate degrees of enhancement was generally similar to that for the control conditions, possibly because subjects did not have sufficient experience with the processed speech. In experiment 2, subjects judged the relative quality and intelligibility of speech in noise processed using a subset of the conditions of experiment 1. Generally, processing with a moderate degree of enhancement was preferred over the control condition, for both quality and intelligibility. Subjects varied in their preferences for high degrees of enhancement. Experiment 3 used a modified processing algorithm, with a moderate degree of spectral enhancement, and examined the effects of combining the enhancement with dynamic range compression. The intelligibility of speech in noise improved with practice, and, after a small amount of practice, scores for the condition combining enhancement with a moderate degree of compression were found to be significantly higher than for the control condition. Experiment 4 used a subset of conditions from experiment 3, but performance was assessed using a sentence verification test that measured both intelligibility and response times. Scores on both measures were improved by spectral enhancement, and improved still more by enhancement combined with compression. The effects were statistically more robust for the response times. When expressed as equivalent changes in speech-to-noise ratio, the improvements were about twice as large for the response times as for the intelligibility scores. The overall effect of spectral enhancement combined with compression was equivalent to an improvement of speech-to-noise ratio by 4.2 dB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8263829

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev        ISSN: 0748-7711


  26 in total

1.  Combined spectral and temporal enhancement to improve cochlear-implant speech perception.

Authors:  Aparajita Bhattacharya; Andrew Vandali; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Spectral processing of two concurrent harmonic complexes.

Authors:  Yi Shen; Virginia M Richards
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The future of hearing aid technology.

Authors:  Brent Edwards
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-03

4.  Gain-induced speech distortions and the absence of intelligibility benefit with existing noise-reduction algorithms.

Authors:  Gibak Kim; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Development of digital hearing AIDS.

Authors:  C Schweitzer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  1997-06

6.  Predictions of Speech Chimaera Intelligibility Using Auditory Nerve Mean-Rate and Spike-Timing Neural Cues.

Authors:  Michael R Wirtzfeld; Rasha A Ibrahim; Ian C Bruce
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-07-26

7.  Mandarin Tone and Vowel Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users: Effects of Talker Variability and Bimodal Hearing.

Authors:  Yi-Ping Chang; Ronald Y Chang; Chun-Yi Lin; Xin Luo
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Idealized computational models for auditory receptive fields.

Authors:  Tony Lindeberg; Anders Friberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Speech perception in noise by children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Amanda Caldwell; Susan Nittrouer
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  Dynamic representation of spectral edges in guinea pig primary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Noelia Montejo; Arnaud J Noreña
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.