Speech recognition in normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss as a function of the number of spectral channels

2006 ◽  
Vol 120 (5) ◽  
pp. 2908-2925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deniz Başkent
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Spectral Channels

Masking of Speech in Young and Elderly Listeners With Hearing Loss

1994 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 655-661 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela E. Souza ◽  
Christopher W. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Masking Noise ◽  
Speech Spectrum ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
High Pass

This study examined the contributions of various properties of background noise to the speech recognition difficulties experienced by young and elderly listeners with hearing loss. Three groups of subjects participated: young listeners with normal hearing, young listeners with sensorineural hearing loss, and elderly listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Sensitivity thresholds up to 4000 Hz of the young and elderly groups of listeners with hearing loss were closely matched, and a high-pass masking noise was added to minimize the contributions of high-frequency (above 4000 Hz) thresholds, which were not closely matched. Speech recognition scores for monosyllables were obtained in the high-pass noise alone and in three noise backgrounds. The latter consisted of high-pass noise plus one of three maskers: speechspectrum noise, speech-spectrum noise temporally modulated by the envelope of multi-talker babble, and multi-talker babble. For all conditions, the groups with hearing impairment consistently scored lower than the group with normal hearing. Although there was a trend toward poorer speech-recognition scores as the masker condition more closely resembled the speech babble, the effect of masker condition was not statistically significant. There was no interaction between group and condition, implying that listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss are affected similarly by the type of background noise when the long-term spectrum of the masker is held constant. A significant effect of age was not observed. In addition, masked thresholds for pure tones in the presence of the speech-spectrum masker were not different for the young and elderly listeners with hearing loss. These results suggest that, for both steady-state and modulated background noises, difficulties in speech recognition for monosyllables are due primarily, and perhaps exclusively, to the presence of sensorineural hearing loss itself, and not to age-specific factors.

Speech-Recognition Difficulties of the Hearing-Impaired Elderly

1990 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 726-735 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Lisa Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Elderly Subjects ◽  
Threshold Elevation

The role that sensorineural hearing loss plays in the speech-recognition difficulties of the hearing-impaired elderly is examined. One approach to this issue was to make between-group comparisons of performance for three groups of subjects: (a) young normal-hearing adults; (b) elderly hearing-impaired adults; and (c) young normal-hearing adults with simulated sensorineural hearing loss equivalent to that of the elderly subjects produced by a spectrally shaped masking noise. Another approach to this issue employed correlational analyses to examine the relation between audibility and speech recognition within the group of elderly hearing-impaired subjects. An additional approach was pursued in which an acoustical index incorporating adjustments for threshold elevation was used to examine the role audibility played in the speech-recognition performance of the hearing-impaired elderly. A wide range of listening conditions was sampled in this experiment. The conclusion was that the primary determiner of speech-recognition performance in the elderly hearing-impaired subjects was their threshold elevation.

scholarly journals Effect of sinusoidally amplitude modulated broadband noise stimuli on stream segregation in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jawahar Antony P ◽  
Animesh Barman
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Frequency ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Broadband Noise ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Stream Segregation ◽  
Temporal Cues

Background and Aim: Auditory stream segre­gation is a phenomenon that splits sounds into different streams. The temporal cues that contri­bute for stream segregation have been previ­ously studied in normal hearing people. In peo­ple with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), the cues for temporal envelope coding is not usually affected, while the temporal fine structure cues are affected. These two temporal cues depend on the amplitude modulation frequency. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of sin­usoidal amplitude modulated (SAM) broadband noises on stream segregation in individuals with SNHL. Methods: Thirty normal hearing subjects and 30 subjects with mild to moderate bilateral SNHL participated in the study. Two experi­ments were performed; in the first experiment, the AB sequence of broadband SAM stimuli was presented, while in the second experiment, only B sequence was presented. A low (16 Hz) and a high (256 kHz) standard modulation fre­quency were used in these experiments. The subjects were asked to find the irregularities in the rhythmic sequence. Results: Both the study groups could identify the irregularities similarly in both the experi­ments. The minimum cumulative delay was sli­ghtly higher in the SNHL group. Conclusion: It is suggested that the temporal cues provided by the broadband SAM noises for low and high standard modulation frequencies were not used for stream segregation by either normal hearing subjects or those with SNHL. Keywords: Stream segregation; sinusoidal amplitude modulation; sensorineural hearing loss

scholarly journals Speech recognition in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss

2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 334-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Neves de Andrade ◽  
Maria Cecilia Martinelli Iorio ◽  
Daniela Gil
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing

scholarly journals Quality of Life in Children with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 162 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evette A. Ronner ◽  
Liliya Benchetrit ◽  
Patricia Levesque ◽  
Razan A. Basonbul ◽  
Michael S. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pedsql 4.0 ◽  
Hearing Device ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Objective To assess quality of life (QOL) in pediatric patients with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 (PedsQL 4.0) and the Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life 26 (HEAR-QL-26) and HEAR-QL-28 surveys. Study Design Prospective longitudinal study. Setting Tertiary care center. Subjects and Methods Surveys were administered to patients with SNHL (ages 2-18 years) from July 2016 to December 2018 at a multidisciplinary hearing loss clinic. Patients aged >7 years completed the HEAR-QL-26, HEAR-QL-28, and PedsQL 4.0 self-report tool, while parents completed the PedsQL 4.0 parent proxy report for children aged ≤7 years. Previously published data from children with normal hearing were used for controls. The independent t test was used for analysis. Results In our cohort of 100 patients, the mean age was 7.7 years (SD, 4.5): 62 participants had bilateral SNHL; 63 had mild to moderate SNHL; and 37 had severe to profound SNHL. Sixty-eight patients used a hearing device. Mean (SD) total survey scores for the PedsQL 4.0 (ages 2-7 and 8-18 years), HEAR-QL-26 (ages 7-12 years), and HEAR-QL-28 (ages 13-18 years) were 83.9 (14.0), 79.2 (11.1), 81.2 (9.8), and 77.5 (11.3), respectively. Mean QOL scores for patients with SNHL were significantly lower than those for controls on the basis of previously published normative data ( P < .0001). There was no significant difference in QOL between children with unilateral and bilateral SNHL or between children with SNHL who did and did not require a hearing device. Low statistical power due to small subgroup sizes limited our analysis. Conclusion It is feasible to collect QOL data from children with SNHL in a hearing loss clinic. Children with SNHL had significantly lower scores on validated QOL instruments when compared with peers with normal hearing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document