Loudness Discomfort Level Modification

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 807-817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry D. Schmitz
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
The Other ◽  
Behavioral Modification ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Adjustment Problems ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Sound Exposure ◽  
Cochlear Hearing Loss

Three assumptions involved in the rationale for loudness tolerance modification were investigated: (1) that an abnormal loudness discomfort level (LDL) is modifiable by sub-LDL stimulation, (2) that a relationship exists between abnormal LDL and reduced speech discrimination ability, and (3) that an improved LDL will result in better speech discrimination than evidenced before such modification. Twenty subjects with functional evidence of bilateral cochlear hearing loss were divided into four group. Each of three groups received a different type of sound exposure and the other groups served as a control. LDLs were determined before, interjacent to, and after exposure. No significant changes in LDL were found for any of the experimental groups. The parabolic articulation function associated in the literature with monaural cochlear lesions was absent for all cases. Sub-LDL exposure to high intensity speech does not appear to be an effective modifier of an abnormal LDL. The rationale for loudness discomfort level modification therapy, namely to improve speech discrimination, appears to be unwarranted. Abnormal loudness discomfort improvement may involve adjustment problems more responsive to behavioral modification approaches.

Noise Exposure, Hearing Loss, Speech Discrimination and Tinnitus

1984 ◽  
Vol 98 (S9) ◽  
pp. 74-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurice H. Miller ◽  
John R. Jakimetz
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Noise Exposure ◽  
Complete Recovery ◽  
Clinical Situation ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Essentially Normal ◽  
Word Discrimination

Noise exposure in the workplace and the recreational environment probably accounts for more new cases of tinnitus and hearing loss than all other causes combined. To an increasing degree, preemployment audiograms of late teenagers and those in their early twenties show noise-induced, sensorineural ‘notches’ greatest at 4000 or 6000 Hz with partial or complete recovery at 8000 Hz. Word discrimination tests, as typically evaluated in a clinical situation, show essentially normal findings although more difficult measures of consonant discriminations such as the California Consonant Test or conventional speech tests in a background of noise often demonstrate impaired word discrimination ability.

An Item-Difficulty Based Speech Discrimination Test

1971 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 865-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. Margolis ◽  
Joseph P. Millin
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Frequency Distribution ◽  
Item Difficulty ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Test ◽  
Speech Discrimination Tests ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Poorly Differentiated

In an attempt to improve the differentiating ability of monosyllabic speech discrimination tests, two equivalent, 25-word test recordings with rectilinear distributions of item difficulty were constructed from W-22 Hirsh recordings. These lists and selected half lists of the standard W-22 recordings were then presented to 40 ears of listeners with losses ranging in severity from -10 dB to 60 dB (SRT) at sensation levels of 20, 30, 40, and 50 dB. Scores obtained with the new lists describe a less skewed frequency distribution than those obtained with the W-22 half lists. The new recordings were also more successful in differentiating between subjects with varying levels of sensorineural hearing losses, particularly between normal-hearing listeners and listeners with mild loss, who are usually poorly differentiated by W-22 tests. This was accomplished without resorting to deliberate distortion of stimulus words. These new recordings appear to have clinical usefulness in their ability to more accurately reflect differences in discrimination ability among listeners and particularly in their ability to reveal reduced discrimination in mild sensorineural hearing loss.

scholarly journals Effects of the Conductive Component of Hearing Loss on Speech Discrimination Ability

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takaomi Kurioka ◽  
◽  
Hajime Sano ◽  
Shogo Furuki ◽  
Taku Yamashita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Conductive Component

Reliability of the Modified Rhyme Test for Hearing

1972 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald W. Bell ◽  
E. James Kreul ◽  
James C. Nixon
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Present State ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Adequate Knowledge ◽  
Response Set ◽  
Modified Rhyme Test ◽  
Normal Performance ◽  
Reliability Coefficients

The reliability and intercorrelations of selected lists from the clinical version of the Modified Rhyme Test (MRT) were examined using normal-hearing young listeners and older listeners believed to have incurred noise-induced hearing loss. Stability of means and variances was generally acceptable for the lists of the MRT, but the reliability coefficients and intercorrelations were generally low. In its present state, the clinical MRT appears to lack the precision to discriminate among normal young listeners, if normal young listeners really do differ in speech discrimination ability with a closed response set. We do not yet have adequate knowledge of the range of expected normal performance for the MRT. The MRT appears far more reliable when used with a much more heterogeneous hearing loss population.

scholarly journals Factors influencing the choice of prescribed hearing aid

2012 ◽  
Vol 140 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 662-665
Author(s):  
Ljubica Zivic ◽  
Danijela Zivic
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Threshold ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Physical And Mental Health ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Factors Influencing

In our paper we would like to emphasize the complexity of hearing aid prescription process. It is connected to a series of factors which impact the choice of hearing aid; type of hearing loss, degree of hearing loss according to the average hearing threshold expressed within the range from 500 Hz to 4000 Hz on a tonal audiogram, audiometric curve configuration, speech discrimination ability, patients? age at which the hearing impairment occurred, time elapsed between the occurrence of hearing impairment and prescription of a hearing aid, patients? age, physical and mental health and their cognitive function, anatomical characteristics of the auricle and external auditory canal, patient and parent motivation, cosmetic factors, financial abilities, cooperation with hearing aids manufacturers. This paper is important for everyday practice and can be used as a kind of guideline to the hearing aid prescription process.

The Effect of Asymmetrical Signal Degradation on Binaural Speech Recognition in Children and Adults

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann M. Rothpletz ◽  
Anne Marie Tharpe ◽  
D. Wesley Grantham
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Relative Performance ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sentence Recognition ◽  
Signal Degradation ◽  
Cochlear Hearing Loss ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
Overall Performance

To determine the effect of asymmetrical signal degradation on binaural speech recognition, 28 children and 14 adults were administered a sentence recognition task amidst multitalker babble. There were 3 listening conditions: (a) monaural, with mild degradation in 1 ear; (b) binaural, with mild degradation in both ears (symmetric degradation); and (c) binaural, with mild degradation in one ear and severe degradation in the other ear (asymmetric degradation). Sentences and babble were degraded digitally to simulate mild and severe cochlear hearing loss. All participants demonstrated significant binaural advantage (average of 7 dB) when listening to symmetrically degraded signals as compared to when listening monaurally. In contrast, adults and children achieved little or no binaural benefit, on average, when listening to asymmetrically degraded signals. Moreover, overall performance of the adults was significantly worse when listening to binaural asymmetrically degraded signals than when listening to monaural signals, thus demonstrating evidence of binaural interference. In contrast to our original speculations, however, children did not show an overall demonstration of binaural interference. Relative performance in the binaural-asymmetric and the monaural conditions was not influenced by which ear (right or left) received the more degraded signal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document