A Comparison of Two Word-Recognition Tasks in Multitalker Babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise Test (WIN)

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (07) ◽  
pp. 548-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Wendy B. Cates
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Pure Tone Average ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: The Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) is a word-recognition instrument that presents the 200 Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (NU-6) words binaurally at 50 dB HL in a multitalker babble at a 9 dB signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) (Cord et al, 1992). The SPRINT was developed by and used by the Army as a more valid predictor of communication abilities (than pure-tone thresholds or word-recognition in quiet) for issues involving fitness for duty from a hearing perspective of Army personnel. The Words-in-Noise test (WIN) is a slightly different word-recognition task in a fixed level multitalker babble with 10 NU-6 words presented at each of 7 S/N from 24 to 0 dB S/N in 4 dB decrements (Wilson, 2003; Wilson and McArdle, 2007). For the two instruments, both the babble and the speakers of the words are different. The SPRINT uses all 200 NU-6 words, whereas the WIN uses a maximum of 70 words. Purpose: The purpose was to compare recognition performances by 24 young listeners with normal hearing and 48 older listeners with sensorineural hearing on the SPRINT and WIN protocols. Research Design: A quasi-experimental, mixed model design was used. Study Sample: The 24 young listeners with normal hearing (19 to 29 years, mean = 23.3 years) were from the local university and had normal hearing (≤20 dB HL; American National Standards Institute, 2004) at the 250–8000 Hz octave intervals. The 48 older listeners with sensorineural hearing loss (60 to 82 years, mean = 69.9 years) had the following inclusion criteria: (1) a threshold at 500 Hz between 15 and 30 dB HL, (2) a threshold at 1000 Hz between 20 and 40 dB HL, (3) a three-frequency pure-tone average (500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) of ≤40 dB HL, (4) word-recognition scores in quiet ≥40%, and (5) no history of middle ear or retrocochlear pathology as determined by an audiologic evaluation. Data Collection and Analysis: The speech materials were presented bilaterally in the following order: (1) the SPRINT at 50 dB HL, (2) two half lists of NU-6 words in quiet at 60 dB HL and 80 dB HL, and (3) the two 35-word lists of the WIN materials with the multitalker babble fixed at 60 dB HL. Data collection occurred during a 40–60 minute session. Recognition performances on each stimulus word were analyzed. Results: The listeners with normal hearing obtained 92.5% correct on the SPRINT with a 50% point on the WIN of 2.7 dB S/N. The listeners with hearing loss obtained 65.3% correct on the SPRINT and a WIN 50% point at 12.0 dB S/N. The SPRINT and WIN were significantly correlated (r = −0.81, p < .01), indicating that the SPRINT had good concurrent validity. The high-frequency, pure-tone average (1000, 2000, 4000 Hz) had higher correlations with the SPRINT, WIN, and NU-6 in quiet than did the traditional three-frequency pure-tone average (500, 1000, 2000 Hz). Conclusions: Graphically and numerically the SPRINT and WIN were highly related, which is indicative of good concurrent validity of the SPRINT.

Clinical Experience with the Words-in-Noise Test on 3430 Veterans: Comparisons with Pure-Tone Thresholds and Word Recognition in Quiet

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (07) ◽  
pp. 405-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Laboratory Studies ◽  
Auditory Function ◽  
Pure Tone Average ◽  
Correct Point ◽  
Audiologic Evaluation

Background: Since the 1940s, measures of pure-tone sensitivity and speech recognition in quiet have been vital components of the audiologic evaluation. Although early investigators urged that speech recognition in noise also should be a component of the audiologic evaluation, only recently has this suggestion started to become a reality. This report focuses on the Words-in-Noise (WIN) Test, which evaluates word recognition in multitalker babble at seven signal-to-noise ratios and uses the 50% correct point (in dB SNR) calculated with the Spearman-Kärber equation as the primary metric. The WIN was developed and validated in a series of 12 laboratory studies. The current study examined the effectiveness of the WIN materials for measuring the word-recognition performance of patients in a typical clinical setting. Purpose: To examine the relations among three audiometric measures including pure-tone thresholds, word-recognition performances in quiet, and word-recognition performances in multitalker babble for veterans seeking remediation for their hearing loss. Research Design: Retrospective, descriptive. Study Sample: The participants were 3430 veterans who for the most part were evaluated consecutively in the Audiology Clinic at the VA Medical Center, Mountain Home, Tennessee. The mean age was 62.3 yr (SD = 12.8 yr). Data Collection and Analysis: The data were collected in the course of a 60 min routine audiologic evaluation. A history, otoscopy, and aural-acoustic immittance measures also were included in the clinic protocol but were not evaluated in this report. Results: Overall, the 1000–8000 Hz thresholds were significantly lower (better) in the right ear (RE) than in the left ear (LE). There was a direct relation between age and the pure-tone thresholds, with greater change across age in the high frequencies than in the low frequencies. Notched audiograms at 4000 Hz were observed in at least one ear in 41% of the participants with more unilateral than bilateral notches. Normal pure-tone thresholds (≤20 dB HL) were obtained from 6% of the participants. Maximum performance on the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (NU-6) in quiet was ≥90% correct by 50% of the participants, with an additional 20% performing at ≥80% correct; the RE performed 1–3% better than the LE. Of the 3291 who completed the WIN on both ears, only 7% exhibited normal performance (50% correct point of ≤6 dB SNR). Overall, WIN performance was significantly better in the RE (mean = 13.3 dB SNR) than in the LE (mean = 13.8 dB SNR). Recognition performance on both the NU-6 and the WIN decreased as a function of both pure-tone hearing loss and age. There was a stronger relation between the high-frequency pure-tone average (1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz) and the WIN than between the pure-tone average (500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) and the WIN. Conclusions: The results on the WIN from both the previous laboratory studies and the current clinical study indicate that the WIN is an appropriate clinic instrument to assess word-recognition performance in background noise. Recognition performance on a speech-in-quiet task does not predict performance on a speech-in-noise task, as the two tasks reflect different domains of auditory function. Experience with the WIN indicates that word-in-noise tasks should be considered the “stress test” for auditory function.

scholarly journals Words in noise audiometry in adult subjects with normal hearing

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Widayat Alviandi ◽  
Jenny Bashiruddin ◽  
Brastho Bramantyo ◽  
Farisa Rizky
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Recognition Threshold ◽  
Speech Audiometry ◽  
Discrimination Score ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Speech Discrimination Score ◽  
Noise Test

Background: Patients with hearing disturbance will generally undergo pure tone audiometry andspeech audiometry in a quiet room, but those examinations cannot evaluate the ability to understand speech in daily environment with a noisy background. Words in noise test will provide valuable informationregarding patient’s hearing problem in noise. Purpose: To evaluate the hearing threshold using wordsin noise test in adults with normal hearing. Method: This cross-sectional study was conducted in CiptoMangunkusumo Hospital from January to April 2017. All subjects who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusioncriteria underwent pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry, and words in noise test. Results: A total of71 individuals with normal hearing were recruited for this study. Words in noise test showed the medianvalue of 67 dB and 100 dB for Speech Recognition Threshold (SRT) 50% and Speech DiscriminationScore (SDS) 100%, respectively. The SRT 50% and SDS 100% were significantly higher in the age group40–60 years compared to the age group 18–39 years. There was also a statistically significant differencebetween males and females at SRT 50% assessed by words in noise audiometry. Conclusion: Wordsin noise test showed a statistically significant difference in SRT 50% and SDS 100% between two agegroups, but no difference was found between genders. The result of this study can be used as a referencefor SRT and SDS values of speech audiometry test in noise.Keywords: words in noise, speech audiometry, speech recognition threshold, speech discrimination score ABSTRAKLatar belakang: Pasien dengan gangguan pendengaran umumnya menjalani pemeriksaanaudiometri nada murni dan audiometri tutur di ruangan yang sunyi, tetapi pemeriksaan ini tidakdapat menggambarkan kemampuan pemahaman wicara di lingkungan sehari-hari yang ramai. Testutur dalam bising dapat mengevaluasi masalah pendengaran pasien dalam keadaan bising. Tujuan:Untuk mengevaluasi ambang pendengaran menggunakan tes tutur dalam bising pada orang dewasadengan pendengaran normal. Metode: Penelitian potong lintang ini dilakukan di Rumah Sakit CiptoMangunkusumo dari Januari hingga April 2017. Semua subjek yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi daneksklusi menjalani pemeriksaan audiometri nada murni, audiometri tutur, dan tes tutur dalam bising.Hasil: Sebanyak 71 orang dengan pendengaran normal diikutsertakan dalam penelitian ini. Tes tuturdalam bising menunjukkan nilai median masing-masing 67 dB dan 100 dB pada Speech RecognitionThreshold (SRT) 50% dan Speech Discrimination Score (SDS) 100%. SRT 50% dan SDS 100% secarasignifikan lebih tinggi pada kelompok usia 40–60 tahun dibandingkan dengan kelompok usia 18–39 tahun. Hasil pemeriksaan tes tutur dalam bising menunjukkan perbedaan yang signifikan antara laki-laki dan wanita pada nilai SRT 50%. Kesimpulan: Tes tutur dalam bising menunjukkan perbedaan yang bermakna secara statistik pada SRT 50% dan SDS 100% antara dua kelompok umur, tetapi tidak ada perbedaan signifikan diantara jenis kelamin. Hasil penelitian ini dapat digunakan sebagai acuan untuk nilai SRT dan SDS pada pemeriksaan audiometri tutur dalam bising.

Temporal Processing in Low-Frequency Channels: Effects of Age and Hearing Loss in Middle-Aged Listeners

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (07) ◽  
pp. 393-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth D. Leigh-Paffenroth ◽  
Saravanan Elangovan
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Temporal Processing ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Gap Detection ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity

Background: Hearing loss and age interfere with the auditory system's ability to process temporal changes in the acoustic signal. A key unresolved question is whether high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss (HFSNHL) affects temporal processing in the low-frequency region where hearing loss is minimal or nonexistent. A second unresolved question is whether changes in hearing occur in middle-aged subjects in the absence of HFSNHL. Purpose: The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to examine the influence of HFSNHL and aging on the auditory temporal processing abilities of low-frequency auditory channels with normal hearing sensitivity and (2) to examine the relations among gap detection measures, self-assessment reports of understanding speech, and functional measures of speech perception in middle-aged individuals with and without HFSNHL. Research Design: The subject groups were matched for either age (middle age) or pure-tone sensitivity (with or without hearing loss) to study the effects of age and HFSNHL on behavioral and functional measures of temporal processing and word recognition performance. These effects were analyzed by individual repeated-measures analyses of variance. Post hoc analyses were performed for each significant main effect and interaction. The relationships among the measures were analyzed with Pearson correlations. Study Sample: Eleven normal-hearing young adults (YNH), eight normal-hearing middle-aged adults (MANH), and nine middle-aged adults with HFSNHL were recruited for this study. Normal hearing sensitivity was defined as pure-tone thresholds ≤25 dB HL for octave frequencies from 250 to 8000 Hz. HFSNHL was defined as pure-tone thresholds ≤25 dB HL from 250 to 2000 Hz and ≥35 dB HL from 3000 to 8000 Hz. Data Collection and Analysis: Gap detection thresholds (GDTs) were measured under within-channel and between-channel conditions with the stimulus spectrum limited to regions of normal hearing sensitivity for the HFSNHL group (i.e., <2000 Hz). Self-perceived hearing problems were measured by a questionnaire (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit), and word recognition performance was assessed under four conditions: quiet and babble, with and without low-pass filtering (cutoff frequency = 2000 Hz). Results: The effects of HFSNHL and age were found for gap detection, self-perceived hearing problems, and word recognition in noise. The presence of HFSNHL significantly increased GDTs for stimuli presented in regions of normal pure-tone sensitivity. In addition, middle-aged subjects with normal hearing sensitivity reported significantly more problems hearing in background noise than the young normal-hearing subjects. Significant relationships between self-report measures of hearing ability in background noise and word recognition in babble were found. Conclusions: The conclusions from the present study are twofold: (1) HFSNHL may have an off-channel impact on auditory temporal processing, and (2) presenescent changes in the auditory system of MANH subjects increased self-perceived problems hearing in background noise and decreased functional performance in background noise compared with YNH subjects.

Effects of Sophistication on Four Tests for Nonorganic Hearing Loss

1977 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 528-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah A. Monro ◽  
Frederick N. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Delayed Auditory Feedback ◽  
Pure Tone Average

Three groups of 15 normal-hearing subjects were asked to simulate a hearing loss in one ear. Each subject was then tested on four measurements often used in determining the presence of pseudohypacusis (a comparison of the SRT to the pure-tone average, ascending vs descending pure-tone tests, the Stenger test, and pure-tone delayed auditory feedback). Results showed that as practice and sophistication on each of the procedures increased, there tended to be more improvement in the subjects' ability to “beat” some of the tests than others.

Speech Recognition in Multitalker Babble Using Digits, Words, and Sentences

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (09) ◽  
pp. 726-739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel A. McArdle ◽  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Christopher A. Burks
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Linguistic Complexity ◽  
Item Questionnaire ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
Better Than

The purpose of this mixed model design was to examine recognition performance differences when measuring speech recognition in multitalker babble on listeners with normal hearing (n = 36) and listeners with hearing loss (n = 72) utilizing stimulus of varying linguistic complexity (digits, words, and sentence materials). All listeners were administered two trials of two lists of each material in a descending speech-to-babble ratio. For each of the materials, recognition performances by the listeners with normal hearing were significantly better than the performances by the listeners with hearing loss. The mean separation between groups at the 50% point in signal-to-babble ratio on each of the three materials was ~8 dB. The 50% points for digits were obtained at a significantly lower signal-to-babble ratio than for sentences or words that were equivalent. There were no interlist differences between the two lists for the digits and words, but there was a significant disparity between QuickSIN™ lists for the listeners with hearing loss. A two-item questionnaire was used to obtain a subjective measurement of speech recognition, which showed moderate correlations with objective measures of speech recognition in noise using digits (r = .641), sentences (r = .572), and words (r = .673).

Totally implantable active middle-ear implants: a large, single-surgeon cohort

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
E McCarty Walsh ◽  
D R Morrison ◽  
W J McFeely
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Middle Ear ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Recognition Score ◽  
Hearing Level ◽  
Pure Tone Average ◽  
Surgeon Experience ◽  
Middle Ear Implants

Abstract Objectives This study aimed to evaluate hearing outcomes and device safety in a large, single-surgeon experience with the totally implantable active middle-ear implants. Methods This was a retrospective case series review of 116 patients with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss undergoing implantation of active middle-ear implants. Results Mean baseline unaided pure tone average improved from 57.6 dB before surgery to 34.1 dB post-operatively, signifying a mean gain in pure tone average of 23.5 dB (p = 0.0002). Phonetically balanced maximum word recognition score improved slightly from 70.5 per cent to 75.8 per cent (p = 0.416), and word recognition score at a hearing level of 50 dB values increased substantially from 14.4 per cent to 70.4 per cent (p < 0.0001). Both revision and explant rates were low and dropped with increasing surgeon experience over time. Conclusion This study showed excellent post-operative hearing results with active middle-ear implants with regard to pure tone average and word recognition score at a hearing level of 50 db. Complication rates in this case series were significantly lower with increasing experience of the surgeon. Active middle-ear implants should be considered in appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss who have struggled with conventional amplification and are good surgical candidates.

scholarly journals İşitme cihazı kullanan çocuklarda gürültüde konuşmayı anlama becerisinin değerlendirilmesi: Preliminer sonuçlar

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-50
Author(s):  
Ecem KARTAL ÖZCAN ◽  
Merve ÖZBAL BATUK ◽  
Şule KAYA ◽  
Gonca SENNAROĞLU
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Classroom Environment ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Assessment of speech perception in noise in children with hearing aids: Preliminary results* Objective: Noisy environments are a part of the daily life of children, just like adults. Children with hearing loss who wear hearing aids are more susceptible to the negative effects of noise than their normal-hearing peers. This study aims to evaluate the speech recognition in noise performance of hearing aid users and compare them with their normal-hearing peers. Material and Method: Five children aged 6-12 years with bilateral moderate to severe symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss and using bilateral behind-the-ear hearing aids were included in the study. 4 different conditions of the Turkish HINT-C were applied, and a speech recognition threshold (SRT) is determined for each condition. Results: Regardless of their age, the SRT needed by children with hearing aids to achieve equal performance with their normal-hearing peers was found to be higher for all test conditions. As seen in children with normal hearing in general, the mean noise front score of the children with hearing loss was higher than the mean noise right and noise left scores. Conclusion: The results of this study revealed that children with bilaterally symmetrical moderate to severe hearing loss achieved poor speech recognition scores in environments similar to the classroom environment, compared to their normal-hearing peers. Our results guided appropriate rehabilitation and follow-up. Keywords: noise, speech recognition in noise, hearing loss, hearing aid, pediatric audiology, HINT, HINT-C

Sentence Recognition in Steady-State Speech-Shaped Noise versus Four-Talker Babble

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (01) ◽  
pp. 054-065
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vermiglio ◽  
Caroline C. Herring ◽  
Paige Heeke ◽  
Courtney E. Post ◽  
Xiangming Fang
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Normal Limits ◽  
Significant Relationships ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
Binaural Listening

AbstractSpeech recognition in noise (SRN) evaluations reveal information about listening ability that is unavailable from pure-tone thresholds. Unfortunately, SRN evaluations are not commonly used in the clinic. A lack of standardization may be an explanation for the lack of widespread acceptance of SRN testing. Arguments have been made for the utilization of steady-state speech-shaped noise vs. multi-talker babble. Previous investigations into the effect of masker type have used a monaural presentation of the stimuli. However, results of monaural SRN tests cannot be generalized to binaural listening conditions.The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of masker type on SRN thresholds under binaural listening conditions.The Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) protocol was selected in order to measure SRN thresholds in steady-state speech-shaped noise (HINT noise) and four-talker babble with and without the spatial separation of the target speech and masker stimuli.Fifty native speakers of English with normal pure-tone thresholds (≤ 25 dB HL, 250–4000 Hz) participated in the study. The mean age was 20.5 years (SD 1.01).All participants were tested using the standard protocol for the HINT in a simulated soundfield environment under TDH-50P headphones. Thresholds were measured for the Noise Front, Noise Left, and Noise Right listening conditions with HINT noise and four-talker babble. The HINT composite score was determined for each noise condition. The spatial advantage was calculated from the HINT thresholds. Pure-tone threshold data were collected using the modified Hughson-Westlake procedure. Statistical analyses include descriptive statistics, effect size, correlations, and repeated measures ANOVA followed by matched-pairs t-tests.Repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to investigate the effects of masker type and noise location on HINT thresholds. Both main effects and their interaction were statistically significant (p < 0.01). No significant differences were found between masker conditions for the Noise Front thresholds. However, for the Noise Side conditions the four-talker babble thresholds were significantly better than the HINT noise thresholds. Overall, greater spatial advantage was found for the four-talker babble as opposed to the HINT noise conditions (p < 0.01). Pearson correlation analysis revealed no significant relationships between four-talker babble and HINT noise speech recognition performances for the Noise Front, Noise Right conditions, and the spatial advantage measures. Significant relationships (p < 0.05) were found between masking noise performances for the Noise Left condition and the Noise Composite scores.One cannot assume that a patient who performs within normal limits on a speech in four-talker babble test will also perform within normal limits on a speech in steady-state speech-shaped noise test, and vice-versa. Additionally, performances for the Noise Front condition cannot be used to predict performances for the Noise Side conditions. The utilization of both HINT noise and four-talker babble maskers, with and without the spatial separation of the stimuli, may be useful when determining the range of speech recognition in noise abilities found in everyday listening conditions.

scholarly journals The Effect of Dynamic Pitch on Speech Recognition in Temporally Modulated Noise

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (9) ◽  
pp. 2725-2739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Shen ◽  
Pamela E. Souza
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Individual Factors ◽  
Temporal Modulation ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Speech Reception ◽  
Speech Reception Thresholds ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

PurposeThis study investigated the effect of dynamic pitch in target speech on older and younger listeners' speech recognition in temporally modulated noise. First, we examined whether the benefit from dynamic-pitch cues depends on the temporal modulation of noise. Second, we tested whether older listeners can benefit from dynamic-pitch cues for speech recognition in noise. Last, we explored the individual factors that predict the amount of dynamic-pitch benefit for speech recognition in noise.MethodYounger listeners with normal hearing and older listeners with varying levels of hearing sensitivity participated in the study, in which speech reception thresholds were measured with sentences in nonspeech noise.ResultsThe younger listeners benefited more from dynamic pitch for speech recognition in temporally modulated noise than unmodulated noise. Older listeners were able to benefit from the dynamic-pitch cues but received less benefit from noise modulation than the younger listeners. For those older listeners with hearing loss, the amount of hearing loss strongly predicted the dynamic-pitch benefit for speech recognition in noise.ConclusionsDynamic-pitch cues aid speech recognition in noise, particularly when noise has temporal modulation. Hearing loss negatively affects the dynamic-pitch benefit to older listeners with significant hearing loss.

The 500 Hz Masking-Level Difference and Word Recognition in Multitalker Babble for 40- to 89-Year-Old Listeners with Symmetrical Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (06) ◽  
pp. 367-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Deborah G. Weakley
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Systematic Relationship ◽  
Masking Level Difference

The purpose of this study was to determine if performances on a 500 Hz MLD task and a word-recognition task in multitalker babble covaried or varied independently for listeners with normal hearing and for listeners with hearing loss. Young listeners with normal hearing (n = 25) and older listeners (25 per decade from 40–80 years, n = 125) with sensorineural hearing loss were studied. Thresholds at 500 and 1000 Hz were ≤30 dB HL and ≤40 dB HL, respectively, with thresholds above 1000 Hz <100 dB HL. There was no systematic relationship between the 500 Hz MLD and word-recognition performance in multitalker babble. Higher SoNo and SπNo; thresholds were observed for the older listeners, but the MLDs were the same for all groups. Word recognition in babble in terms of signal-to-babble ratio was on average 6.5 (40- to 49-year-old group) to 10.8 dB (80- to 89-year-old group) poorer for the older listeners with hearing loss. Neither pure-tone thresholds nor word-recognition abilities in quiet accurately predicted word-recognition performance in multitalker babble.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document