Phoneme and Word Recognition for Words in Isolation and in Sentences

Olsen, Wayne O.; Tasell, Dianne J. Van; Speaks, Charles

doi:10.1097/00003446-199706000-00001

Cited by 52 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Boothroyd and Nittrouer found significant differences in consonant-identification performance for words and nonsense syllables presented in separate lists. Other investigators have obtained similar results [6,19]. However, because only 240 of 1,000 possible CVC combinations were used in these experiments, they did not analyze the processing of initial and final consonants independent of each other and the accompanying vowel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…The population with hearing impairment demonstrated impairments on both tests. However, they also demonstrated increased benefits of sentence context among subjects with hearing impairment [6].…”

Section: A Case Studymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Patients with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) have significantly higher sentence reception thresholds (SeRTs), even with hearing aids [2][3][4][5], than subjects with normal hearing. This finding reflects a degradation of the acoustic cues that have their greatest impact on consonant discrimination [6]. In contrast, vowel identification is relatively well preserved [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Elevated SeRTs are also typically reported in patients with hearing loss [6]. However, SeRTs would be expected to show less elevation than CaST thresholds for two reasons.…”

Section: A Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…How is consonant-identification performance affected by SNHL? Since SNHL typically produces greater audiometric deficits at high frequencies, disproportionate impairments in consonant identification would be expected for those consonants whose discrimination depends disproportionately on low-intensity, high-frequency acoustic cues [6,[21][22]. These consonants are primarily plosives and nonsibilant fricatives that generally require SNRs that are well above SeRTs for their identification.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Measuring consonant identification in nonsense syllables, words, and sentences

Woods

Yund²,

Herron³

2010

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) produces deficits in speech comprehension in noise that primarily are due to impairments in identifying consonants. Here, we describe the California Syllable Test (CaST) that quantifies the identification of common American English consonants. In experiment I, 16 young subjects with normal hearing identified 720 consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) syllables in three test sessions. Consonants were identified slightly more accurately in words than nonsense syllables, and small interactions were found between the processing of initial and final consonants. Consonant-identification performance correlated strongly with sentence reception thresholds (SeRTs) measured with both the Hearing in Noise Test and QuickSIN (Etymotic Research; Elk Grove Village, Illinois). At SeRTs, subjects with normal hearing could identify 32.5% of consonants in isolated CVCs. In experiment II, a patient with moderate SNHL showed large elevations in consonant-identification thresholds and smaller elevations in SeRTs. At SeRT levels, the patient could identify only 12.5% of consonants in isolated CVCs, indicating that sentence comprehension relied disproportionately on vowel cues and semantic constraints. Consonant-profile analysis revealed disproportional impairments in identifying consonants dependent on high-frequency acoustic cues. Consonant confusion analysis revealed a reorganization of consonant perception. The CaST is a promising tool for evaluating consonantspecific processing deficits in patients with hearing impairment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: A Case Studymentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Elevated SeRTs are also typically reported in patients with hearing loss [6]. However, SeRTs would be expected to show less elevation than CaST thresholds for two reasons.…”

Section: A Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Measuring consonant identification in nonsense syllables, words, and sentences

Woods

Yund²,

Herron³

2010

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Hearing Aids and Hearing Impairment

Edwards¹

Springer Handbook of Auditory Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of Electrode Configuration and Place of Stimulation on Speech Perception with Cochlear Prostheses

Pfingst

Franck

et al. 2001

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research and clinical experience with cochlear implants suggest that subjects' speech recognition with monopolar or broad bipolar stimulation might be equal to or better than that obtained with narrow bipolar stimulation or other spatially restricted electrode configurations. Furthermore, subjects often prefer the monopolar configurations. The mechanisms underlying these effects are not clear. Two hypotheses are (a) that broader configurations excite more neurons resulting in a more detailed and robust neural representation of the signal and (b) that broader configurations achieve a better spatial distribution of the excited neurons. In this study we compared the effects of electrode configuration and the effects of longitudinal placement and spacing of the active electrodes on speech recognition in human subjects. We used experimental processor maps consisting of 11 active electrodes in a 22-electrode scala tympani array. Narrow bipolar (BP), wide bipolar (BP + 6), and monopolar (MP2) configurations were tested with various locations of active electrodes. We tested basal, centered, and apical locations (with adjacent active electrodes) and spatially distributed locations (with every other electrode active) with electrode configuration held constant. Ten postlingually deafened adult human subjects with Nucleus prostheses were tested using the SPEAK processing strategy. The effects of electrode configuration and longitudinal place of stimulation on recognition of CNC phonemes and words in quiet and CUNY sentences in noise (+10 dB S/N) were similar. Both independent variables had large effects on speech recognition and there were interactions between these variables. These results suggest that the effects of electrode configuration on speech recognition might be due, in part, to differences among the various configurations in the spatial location of stimulation. Correlations of subjective judgments of sound quality with speech-recognition ability were moderate, suggesting that the mechanisms contributing to subjective quality and speech-recognition ability do not completely overlap.

show abstract

Phoneme and Word Recognition for Words in Isolation and in Sentences

Cited by 52 publications

References 25 publications

Measuring consonant identification in nonsense syllables, words, and sentences

Measuring consonant identification in nonsense syllables, words, and sentences

Hearing Aids and Hearing Impairment

Effects of Electrode Configuration and Place of Stimulation on Speech Perception with Cochlear Prostheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About