Word-Recognition Performance in Interrupted Noise by Young Listeners with Normal Hearing and Older Listeners with Hearing Loss

Wilson, Richard H.; McArdle, Rachel; Betancourt, Mavie B.; Herring, Kaileen D.; Lipton, Teresa; Chisolm, Theresa H.

doi:10.3766/jaaa.21.2.4

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Listeners have been shown to be quite good at understanding interrupted speech over a wide range of interruption conditions (e.g., Miller and Licklider, 1950). This has been found for interrupted speech in quiet, in different types of noise, and for speech interrupted by or masked by modulated noise (Cooke, 2003;George et al, 2006;George et al, 2007;Iyer et al, 2007;Jin and Nelson, 2010;Lee and Kewley-Port, 2009;Li and Loizou, 2007;Powers and Wilcox, 1977;Wang and Humes, 2010;Wilson et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Effects of age and hearing loss on the recognition of interrupted words in isolation and in sentences

Kidd

Humes

2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to recognize spoken words interrupted by silence was investigated with young normalhearing listeners and older listeners with and without hearing impairment. Target words from the revised SPIN test by Bilger et al. [J. Speech Hear. Res. 27(1), 32-48 (1984)] were presented in isolation and in the original sentence context using a range of interruption patterns in which portions of speech were replaced with silence. The number of auditory "glimpses" of speech and the glimpse proportion (total duration glimpsed/word duration) were varied using a subset of the SPIN target words that ranged in duration from 300 to 600 ms. The words were presented in isolation, in the context of low-predictability (LP) sentences, and in high-predictability (HP) sentences. The glimpse proportion was found to have a strong influence on word recognition, with relatively little influence of the number of glimpses, glimpse duration, or glimpse rate. Although older listeners tended to recognize fewer interrupted words, there was considerable overlap in recognition scores across listener groups in all conditions, and all groups were affected by interruption parameters and context in much the same way.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Effects of age and hearing loss on the recognition of interrupted words in isolation and in sentences

Kidd

Humes

2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…iller (1947) and Miller and Licklider (1950) provided the early work on the effects that silent or noise interruptions have on speech recognition. Subsequently, a multitude of investigations using a variety of interruption paradigms have been reported that involve both listeners with normal hearing for pure tones and listeners with sensorineural hearing loss (e.g., Cherry, 1953;Huggins, 1964;Dirks et al, 1969;Wilson and Carhart, 1969;Powers and Speaks, 1973;Howard-Jones and Rosen, 1993;Wang and Humes, 2010;Wilson et al, 2010;Kidd and Humes, 2012). The study reported here is the third in a series of investigations from our laboratory examining the effects that the location of the interruption pattern has on word recognition performance (Wilson 2014;Wilson and Irish, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

Recognition Performance of Interrupted Monosyllabic Words: The Effects of Ten Interruption Locations

Wilson

Hamm

2015

J Am Acad Audiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

First, some words (utterances of those words) were immune to any differential effects of the ten interruption patterns. These words with flat performance functions constituted 46% of the word corpus. Second, 49% of the words exhibited U-shaped performance functions that were always systematic, going from maximum to minimum and back to maximum. These words were thought to be more dependent on the initial consonant to attain maximum performance. The conclusion is that some words are not affected by the location of the interruption pattern (those with flat functions) whereas other words are substantially affected (those with U-shaped functions).

show abstract

“…Many older listeners, particularly those with hearing loss, receive limited benefit from temporal modulation in noise (Dubno, Horwitz, & Ahlstrom, 2003;George, Festen, & Houtgast, 2006;Takahashi & Bacon, 1992;Wilson et al, 2010) and have difficulty understanding speech in these scenarios. This problem has been attributed to factors such as reduced high-frequency audibility (e.g., Bacon, Opie, & Montoya, 1998), poor temporal resolution that diminishes opportunities for glimpsing (e.g., Festen & Plomp, 1990;Gordon-Salant, 2005), and a more favorable baseline SNR that limits the glimpsing benefit (e.g., Bernstein & Grant, 2009).…”

Section: Dynamic Pitch and Older Listeners' Speech Recognition In Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

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

Shen

Souza

2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This 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. Method Younger 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. Results The 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. Conclusions Dynamic-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.

show abstract

Word-Recognition Performance in Interrupted Noise by Young Listeners with Normal Hearing and Older Listeners with Hearing Loss

Abstract: The current data indicate that interrupted noise does provide a better differentiation both between listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss and among listeners with hearing loss than is provided by continuous noise.

Cited by 20 publications

References 37 publications

Effects of age and hearing loss on the recognition of interrupted words in isolation and in sentences

Effects of age and hearing loss on the recognition of interrupted words in isolation and in sentences

Recognition Performance of Interrupted Monosyllabic Words: The Effects of Ten Interruption Locations

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About