No abstract

No abstract

Some of the most common interfering background sounds a listener experiences are the sounds of other talkers. In Experiment 1, recognition for natural Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) sentences was measured in normal-hearing adults at two fixed signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) in 16 backgrounds with the same long-term spectrum: unprocessed speech babble (1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 talkers), noise-vocoded versions of the babbles (12 channels), noise modulated with the wide-band envelope of the speech babbles, and unmodulated noise. All talkers were adult males. For a given number of talkers, natural speech was always the most effective masker. The greatest changes in performance occurred as the number of talkers in the maskers increased from 1 to 2 or 4, with small changes thereafter. In Experiment 2, the same targets and maskers (1, 2, and 16 talkers) were used to measure speech reception thresholds (SRTs) adaptively. Periodicity in the target was also manipulated by noise-vocoding, which led to considerably higher SRTs. The greatest masking effect always occurred for the masker type most similar to the target, while the effects of the number of talkers were generally small. Implications are drawn with reference to glimpsing, informational vs energetic masking, overall SNR, and aspects of periodicity.

Hearing aid amplification can be used as a model for studying the effects of auditory stimulation on the central auditory system (CAS). We examined the effects of stimulus presentation level on the physiological detection of sound in unaided and aided conditions. P1, N1, P2, and N2 cortical evoked potentials were recorded in sound field from 13 normal-hearing young adults in response to a 1000-Hz tone presented at seven stimulus intensity levels. As expected, peak amplitudes increased and peak latencies decreased with increasing intensity for unaided and aided conditions. However, there was no significant effect of amplification on latencies or amplitudes. Taken together, these results demonstrate that 20 dB of hearing aid gain affects neural responses differently than 20 dB of stimulus intensity change. Hearing aid signal processing is discussed as a possible contributor to these results. This study demonstrates (1) the importance of controlling for stimulus intensity when evoking responses in aided conditions, and (2) the need to better understand the interaction between the hearing aid and the CAS.