Acoustic Dimensions of Hearing-Impaired Speakers’ Intelligibility

Abstract

Regression and principal components analyses were employed to study the relationship between 28 segmental and suprasegmental acoustic parameters of speech production and measures of speech intelligibility for 40 severely to profoundly hearing-impaired persons in an effort to extend the findings of Metz, Samar, Schiavetti, Sitler, and Whitehead (1985). The principal components analysis derived six factors that accounted for 59% of the variance in the original 28 parameters. Consistent with the findings of Metz et al., a subsequent regression analysis using these six factors as predictor variables revealed two factors with strong predictive relationships to speech intelligibility. One factor primarily reflected segmental production processes related to the temporal and spatial differentiation of phonemes, whereas the other primarily reflected suprasegmental production processes associated with contrastive stress. However, the predictive capability of the present factor structure was somewhat reduced relative to the findings of Metz et al. (1985). Data presented indicate that the populations sampled in the two studies may have differed on one or more dimensions of subject characteristics. Considered collectively, the present findings and the findings of Metz et al. support the tractability of employing selected acoustic variables for the estimation of speech intelligibility.

An acoustic and perceptual study of initial stops produced by profoundly hearing impaired adolescents

“…The profoundly hearing impaired adolescent speakers did not distinguish between aspirated and unaspirated initial stops in terms of VOT in that the values of the VOT for both stops were similar to the lower values for unaspirated stops as produced by the control speakers. Such findings are in agreement with the results of acoustic studies on initial stops produced by profoundly hearing impaired speakers who studied in schools for the deaf, both in English (Monsen, 1976;Samar et al, 1989;Metz et al, 1990) and in French (Ryalls, Larouche, & Giroux, 2003). Tam (1996) reported that Cantonese-speaking profoundly hearing impaired children who were integrated into normal schools produced aspirated stops with significantly longer VOT than the unaspirated stops.…”

Comparison of Intelligibility Measures for Adults With Parkinson's Disease, Adults With Multiple Sclerosis, and Healthy Controls

“…Several dysarthria studies have used multiple tasks (i.e., direct magnitude estimation vs. transcription) to index intelligibility for different types of speech stimuli (e.g., Metz, Schiavetti, Samar, & Sitler, 1990;Sussman & Tjaden, 2012;Yunusova, Weismer, Kent, & Rusche, 2005). However, limited knowledge is available about how objective and subjective metrics of intelligibility compare for the same stimuli.…”

Single‐word intelligibility in speakers with repaired cleft palate

“…However, this technique has been used in previous studies of intelligibility, even with a smaller-than-optimal ratio of number of subjects to predictor variables (e.g. Monsen, 1978;Ansel, 1985;Metz, Samar, Schiavetti, Sitler and Whitehead, 1985;Metz, Schiavetti, Samar and Sitler, 1990;Whitehill and Ciocca, 2000).…”