Relations between perceptual measures of temporal processing, auditory-evoked brainstem responses and speech intelligibility in noise

Papakonstantinou, Alexandra; Strelcyk, Olaf; Dau, Torsten

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2011.02.005

Cited by 28 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The only significant correlation was that of IPD thresholds at 500 Hz with speech scores in noise for the lowfrequency region. This contrasts with the outcome of some previous studies (e.g., Lorenzi et al, 2009;Papakonstantinou et al, 2011;Strelcyk and Dau, 2009), which showed that binaural sensitivity to TFS was correlated with speech scores. Hopkins and Moore (2011) found small but significant correlations between speech reception thresholds in steady and modulated noise and IPD thresholds (measured using the TFS-LF test).…”

Section: Origin Of the Suprathreshold Auditory Deficitscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Abnormal speech processing in frequency regions where absolute thresholds are normal for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Origin Of the Suprathreshold Auditory Deficitscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Abnormal speech processing in frequency regions where absolute thresholds are normal for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Electronic mail: agnes.leger@ens.fr b) Also at: CNRS, UMR 8185 and Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. (Santurette and Dau, 2007;Lorenzi et al, 2009;Strelcyk and Dau, 2009;Ardoint et al, 2010;Papakonstantinou et al, 2011). For both frequency regions, consonant identification was significantly poorer for the HI than for the NH listeners, more so in noise than in quiet, indicating speech perception deficits for frequencies where audiometric thresholds were normal or near-normal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…A reduction of frequency selectivity might play some role in this deficit, as discussed in the preceding text. It could also be the case that the HI listeners had a reduced ability to process TFS information (Santurette and Dau, 2007;Lorenzi et al, 2009;Strelcyk and Dau, 2009;Ardoint et al, 2010;Papakonstantinou et al, 2011), perhaps associated with reduced frequency selectivity (Moore, 2008;Heinz et al, 2010). Finally, the small differences in hearing thresholds between the NH listeners (average PTA of 8 dB HL in both the low-and mid-frequency region) and the HI listeners (average PTA of 18 and 21 dB HL in the low-and mid-frequency region, respectively) tested by Léger et al (2012) may have played a role, although Léger et al (2012) argued that differences in audibility between the NH and HI listeners were very small and speech identification scores were uncorrelated with a measure of speech audibility.…”

Section: Effect Of Spectral Smearing On Temporal and Spectral Mrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of spectral smearing on the identification of speech in noise filtered into low- and mid-frequency regions

Léger¹,

Moore

Gnansia³

et al. 2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Léger et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1502-1514 (2012)] reported deficits in the identification of consonants in noise by hearing-impaired listeners using stimuli filtered into low- or mid-frequency regions in which audiometric thresholds were normal or near-normal. The deficits could not be fully explained in terms of reduced audibility or temporal-envelope processing. However, previous studies indicate that the listeners may have had reduced frequency selectivity, with auditory filters broadened by a factor of about 1.3, despite having normal or near-normal audiometric thresholds in the tested regions. The present study aimed to determine whether the speech-perception deficits could be explained by such a small reduction of frequency selectivity. Consonant identification was measured for normal-hearing listeners in quiet and in unmodulated and modulated noises using the same method as Léger et al. The signal-to-noise ratio was set to -3 dB for the masked conditions. Various amounts of reduced frequency selectivity were simulated using a spectral-smearing algorithm. Performance was reduced only for spectral-smearing factors greater than 1.7. For all conditions, identification scores for hearing-impaired listeners could not be explained by a mild reduction of frequency selectivity.

show abstract

“…Although performance on these tasks has been directly linked to older adults' speech processing abilities (e.g. Papakonstantinou et al, 2011), thereby highlighting the importance of auditory processing in speech perception, it remains unclear whether auditory processing of non-speech stimuli taps the same abilities as processing of speech stimuli. Kidd et al (2007) included identification of nonsense syllables, words, and sentences in their analysis of auditory abilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlates of older adults’ discrimination of acoustic properties in speech

Neger

Janse

Rietveld

2014

Speech, Language and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory discrimination of speech stimuli is an essential tool in speech and language therapy, for example, in dysarthria rehabilitation. It is unclear, however, which listener characteristics are associated with the ability to perceive differences between one's own utterance and target speech. Knowledge about such associations may help to support patients participating in speech and language therapy programs that involve auditory discrimination tasks. Discrimination performance was evaluated in 96 healthy participants over 60 years of age as individuals with dysarthria are typically in this age group. Participants compared meaningful words and sentences on the dimensions of loudness, pitch, and speech rate. Auditory abilities were assessed using pure-tone audiometry, speech audiometry, and speech understanding in noise. Cognitive measures included auditory short-term memory, working memory, and processing speed. Linguistic functioning was assessed by means of vocabulary knowledge and language proficiency. Exploratory factor analyses showed that discrimination performance was primarily associated with cognitive and linguistic skills, rather than auditory abilities. Accordingly, older adults' discrimination performance was mainly predicted by cognitive and linguistic skills. Discrimination accuracy was higher in older adults with better speech understanding in noise, faster processing speed, and better language proficiency, but accuracy decreased with age. This raises the question whether these associations generalize to clinical populations and, if so, whether patients with better cognitive or linguistic skills may benefit more from discriminationbased therapeutic approaches than patients with poorer cognitive or linguistic abilities.

show abstract

Relations between perceptual measures of temporal processing, auditory-evoked brainstem responses and speech intelligibility in noise

Cited by 28 publications

References 56 publications

Abnormal speech processing in frequency regions where absolute thresholds are normal for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss

Abnormal speech processing in frequency regions where absolute thresholds are normal for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss

Effects of spectral smearing on the identification of speech in noise filtered into low- and mid-frequency regions

Correlates of older adults’ discrimination of acoustic properties in speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About