Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing‐impaired and normal‐hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds

1995 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 1165-1174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy R. Dubno ◽  
Amy B. Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Frequency Selectivity ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Consonant Recognition

Suprathreshold Auditory Processing and Speech Perception in Noise: Hearing-Impaired and Normal-Hearing Listeners

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (04) ◽  
pp. 274-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Van Summers ◽  
Matthew J. Makashay ◽  
Sarah M. Theodoroff ◽  
Marjorie R. Leek
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Detection Task ◽  
Frequency Selectivity ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Peripheral Compression

Background: It is widely believed that suprathreshold distortions in auditory processing contribute to the speech recognition deficits experienced by hearing-impaired (HI) listeners in noise. Damage to outer hair cells and attendant reductions in peripheral compression and frequency selectivity may contribute to these deficits. In addition, reduced access to temporal fine structure (TFS) information in the speech waveform may play a role. Purpose: To examine how measures of peripheral compression, frequency selectivity, and TFS sensitivity relate to speech recognition performance by HI listeners. To determine whether distortions in processing reflected by these psychoacoustic measures are more closely associated with speech deficits in steady-state or modulated noise. Research Design: Normal-hearing (NH) and HI listeners were tested on tasks examining frequency selectivity (notched-noise task), peripheral compression (temporal masking curve task), and sensitivity to TFS information (frequency modulation [FM] detection task) in the presence of random amplitude modulation. Performance was tested at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz at several presentation levels. The same listeners were tested on sentence recognition in steady-state and modulated noise at several signal-to-noise ratios. Study Sample: Ten NH and 18 HI listeners were tested. NH listeners ranged in age from 36 to 80 yr (M = 57.6). For HI listeners, ages ranged from 58 to 87 yr (M = 71.8). Results: Scores on the FM detection task at 1 and 2 kHz were significantly correlated with speech scores in both noise conditions. Frequency selectivity and compression measures were not as clearly associated with speech performance. Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) analyses indicated only small differences in speech audibility across subjects for each signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) condition that would predict differences in speech scores no greater than 10% at a given SNR. Actual speech scores varied by as much as 80% across subjects. Conclusions: The results suggest that distorted processing of audible speech cues was a primary factor accounting for differences in speech scores across subjects and that reduced ability to use TFS cues may be an important component of this distortion. The influence of TFS cues on speech scores was comparable in steady-state and modulated noise. Speech recognition was not related to audibility, represented by the SII, once high-frequency sensitivity differences across subjects (beginning at 5 kHz) were removed statistically. This might indicate that high-frequency hearing loss is associated with distortions in processing in lower-frequency regions.

Frequency Selectivity in Normally-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Observers

1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 646-669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Florentine ◽  
Søren Buus ◽  
Bertram Scharf ◽  
Eberhard Zwicker
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Narrow Band ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Frequency Selectivity ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Tuning Curves ◽  
Reduced Frequency ◽  
Cochlear Hearing Loss ◽  
Test Level ◽  
Loudness Summation

This study compares frequency selectivity—as measured by four different methods—in observers with normal hearing and in observers with conductive (non-otosclerotic), otosclerotic, noise-induced, or degenerative hearing losses. Each category of loss was represented by a group of 7 to 10 observers, who were tested at center frequencies of 500 Hz and 4000 Hz. For each group, the following four measurements were made: psychoacoustical tuning curves, narrow-band masking, two-tone masking, and loudness summation. Results showed that (a) frequency selectivity was reduced at frequencies where a cochlear hearing loss was present, (b) frequency selectivity was reduced regardless of the test level at which normally-hearing observers and observers with cochlear impairment were compared, (c) all four measures of frequency selectivity were significantly correlated and (d) reduced frequency selectivity was positively correlated with the amount of cochlear hearing loss.

Consonant-Recognition Patterns and Self-Assessment of Hearing Handicap

1991 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 1397-1409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Goldschmidt Hustedde ◽  
Terry L. Wiley
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Error Patterns ◽  
Consonant Recognition ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
Hearing Handicap

Two companion experiments were conducted with normal-hearing subjects and subjects with high-frequency, sensorineural hearing loss. In Experiment 1, the validity of a self-assessment device of hearing handicap was evaluated in two groups of hearing-impaired listeners with significantly different consonant-recognition ability. Data for the Hearing Performance Inventory—Revised (Lamb, Owens, & Schubert, 1983) did not reveal differences in self-perceived handicap for the two groups of hearing-impaired listeners; it was sensitive to perceived differences in hearing abilities for listeners who did and did not have a hearing loss. Experiment 2 was aimed at evaluation of consonant error patterns that accounted for observed group differences in consonant-recognition ability. Error patterns on the Nonsense-Syllable Test (NST) across the two subject groups differed in both degree and type of error. Listeners in the group with poorer NST performance always demonstrated greater difficulty with selected low-frequency and high-frequency syllables than did listeners in the group with better NST performance. Overall, the NST was sensitive to differences in consonant-recognition ability for normal hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Hearing Aid Amplification Reduces Communication Effort of People With Hearing Impairment and Their Conversation Partners

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1299-1311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Beechey ◽  
Jörg M. Buchholz ◽  
Gitte Keidser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Referential Communication ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Directional Hearing ◽  
Acoustic Environment ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
The Impact

Objectives This study investigates the hypothesis that hearing aid amplification reduces effort within conversation for both hearing aid wearers and their communication partners. Levels of effort, in the form of speech production modifications, required to maintain successful spoken communication in a range of acoustic environments are compared to earlier reported results measured in unaided conversation conditions. Design Fifteen young adult normal-hearing participants and 15 older adult hearing-impaired participants were tested in pairs. Each pair consisted of one young normal-hearing participant and one older hearing-impaired participant. Hearing-impaired participants received directional hearing aid amplification, according to their audiogram, via a master hearing aid with gain provided according to the NAL-NL2 fitting formula. Pairs of participants were required to take part in naturalistic conversations through the use of a referential communication task. Each pair took part in five conversations, each of 5-min duration. During each conversation, participants were exposed to one of five different realistic acoustic environments presented through highly open headphones. The ordering of acoustic environments across experimental blocks was pseudorandomized. Resulting recordings of conversational speech were analyzed to determine the magnitude of speech modifications, in terms of vocal level and spectrum, produced by normal-hearing talkers as a function of both acoustic environment and the degree of high-frequency average hearing impairment of their conversation partner. Results The magnitude of spectral modifications of speech produced by normal-hearing talkers during conversations with aided hearing-impaired interlocutors was smaller than the speech modifications observed during conversations between the same pairs of participants in the absence of hearing aid amplification. Conclusions The provision of hearing aid amplification reduces the effort required to maintain communication in adverse conditions. This reduction in effort provides benefit to hearing-impaired individuals and also to the conversation partners of hearing-impaired individuals. By considering the impact of amplification on both sides of dyadic conversations, this approach contributes to an increased understanding of the likely impact of hearing impairment on everyday communication.

scholarly journals Perception of Auditory Distance in Normal-Hearing and Moderate-to-Profound Hearing-Impaired Listeners

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 233121651988761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilles Courtois ◽  
Vincent Grimaldi ◽  
Hervé Lissek ◽  
Philippe Estoppey ◽  
Eleftheria Georganti
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Spatial Cues ◽  
Linear Amplification ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Wireless Microphone ◽  
Auditory Distance ◽  
Non Linear

The auditory system allows the estimation of the distance to sound-emitting objects using multiple spatial cues. In virtual acoustics over headphones, a prerequisite to render auditory distance impression is sound externalization, which denotes the perception of synthesized stimuli outside of the head. Prior studies have found that listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss are able to perceive auditory distance and are sensitive to externalization. However, this ability may be degraded by certain factors, such as non-linear amplification in hearing aids or the use of a remote wireless microphone. In this study, 10 normal-hearing and 20 moderate-to-profound hearing-impaired listeners were instructed to estimate the distance of stimuli processed with different methods yielding various perceived auditory distances in the vicinity of the listeners. Two different configurations of non-linear amplification were implemented, and a novel feature aiming to restore a sense of distance in wireless microphone systems was tested. The results showed that the hearing-impaired listeners, even those with a profound hearing loss, were able to discriminate nearby and far sounds that were equalized in level. Their perception of auditory distance was however more contracted than in normal-hearing listeners. Non-linear amplification was found to distort the original spatial cues, but no adverse effect on the ratings of auditory distance was evident. Finally, it was shown that the novel feature was successful in allowing the hearing-impaired participants to perceive externalized sounds with wireless microphone systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document