Effects of Adaptive Hearing Aid Directionality and Noise Reduction on Masked Speech Recognition for Children Who Are Hard of Hearing

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna M. Browning ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Mary Flaherty ◽  
Tim Vallier ◽  
Lori J. Leibold
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Fully Adaptive ◽  
Noise Ratio

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate speech-in-noise and speech-in-speech recognition associated with activation of a fully adaptive directional hearing aid algorithm in children with mild to severe bilateral sensory/neural hearing loss. Method Fourteen children (5–14 years old) who are hard of hearing participated in this study. Participants wore laboratory hearing aids. Open-set word recognition thresholds were measured adaptively for 2 hearing aid settings: (a) omnidirectional (OMNI) and (b) fully adaptive directionality. Each hearing aid setting was evaluated in 3 listening conditions. Fourteen children with normal hearing served as age-matched controls. Results Children who are hard of hearing required a more advantageous signal-to-noise ratio than children with normal hearing to achieve comparable performance in all 3 conditions. For children who are hard of hearing, the average improvement in signal-to-noise ratio when comparing fully adaptive directionality to OMNI was 4.0 dB in noise, regardless of target location. Children performed similarly with fully adaptive directionality and OMNI settings in the presence of the speech maskers. Conclusions Compared to OMNI, fully adaptive directionality improved speech recognition in steady noise for children who are hard of hearing, even when they were not facing the target source. This algorithm did not affect speech recognition when the background noise was speech. Although the use of hearing aids with fully adaptive directionality is not proposed as a substitute for remote microphone systems, it appears to offer several advantages over fixed directionality, because it does not depend on children facing the target talker and provides access to multiple talkers within the environment. Additional experiments are required to further evaluate children's performance under a variety of spatial configurations in the presence of both noise and speech maskers.

Adaptation of the BKB-SIN Test for Use as a Pediatric Aided Outcome Measure

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (06) ◽  
pp. 375-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stella L. Ng ◽  
Christine N. Meston ◽  
Susan D. Scollie ◽  
Richard C. Seewald
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
Noise Ratio

Background: There is a need for objective pediatric hearing aid outcome measurement and thus a need for the evaluation of outcome measures. We explored a commercially available pediatric sentence-in-noise measure adapted for use as an aided outcome measure. Purpose: The purposes of the current study were (1) to administer an adapted BKB-SIN (Bamford-Kowal-Bench Speech-in-Noise test) to adults and children who have normal hearing and children who use hearing aids and (2) to evaluate the utility of this adapted BKB-SIN as an aided, within-subjects outcome measure for amplification strategies. Research Design: We used a mixed within and between groups design to evaluate speech recognition in noise for the three groups of participants. The children who use hearing aids were tested under the omnidirectional, directional, and digital noise reduction (DNR) conditions. Results from each group were compared to each other, and we compared results of each aided condition for the children who use hearing aids to evaluate the test utility as an aided outcome measure. Study Sample: The study sample consisted of 14 adults with normal hearing (aged 22–28 yr) and 15 children with normal hearing (aged 6–18 yr), recruited through word of mouth, and 14 children who use hearing aids (aged 9–16 yr) recruited from local audiology clinics. Data Collection and Analysis: List pairs of the BKB-SIN test were presented at 50 dB HL as follows: four list pairs to each participant with normal hearing, four list pairs in the omnidirectional condition, and two list pairs in the directional and DNR conditions. Children who use hearing aids were fitted bilaterally with laboratory devices and completed the BKB-SIN test aided. Data were plotted as mean percent of key words correct at each signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Further, we conducted an analysis of variance for group differences and within-groups for the three aided conditions. Results: Adult participants outperformed children with normal hearing, who outperformed the children who use hearing aids. SNR-50 (signal-to-noise ratio at which listener can obtain a speech recognition score of 50% correct) scores demonstrated reliability of the adapted test implementation. The BKB-SIN test measured significant differences in performance for omnidirectional versus directional microphone conditions but not between omnidirectional and DNR conditions. Conclusions: We conclude that the adapted implementation of the BKB-SIN test can be administered reliably and feasibly. Further study is warranted to develop norms for the adapted implementation as well as to determine if an adapted implementation can be sensitive to age effects. Until such norms are developed, clinicians should refrain from comparing results from the adapted test to the test manual norms and should instead use the adapted implementation as a within-subject measure.

scholarly journals Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 233121652093339
Author(s):  
Els Walravens ◽  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Louise Hickson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Real World ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Traffic Noise ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Acoustic Environment ◽  
Change Environment ◽  
Noise Ratio

Trainable hearing aids let users fine-tune their hearing aid settings in their own listening environment: Based on consistent user-adjustments and information about the acoustic environment, the trainable aids will change environment-specific settings to the user’s preference. A requirement for effective fine-tuning is consistency of preference for similar settings in similar environments. The aim of this study was to evaluate consistency of preference for settings differing in intensity, gain-frequency slope, and directionality when listening in simulated real-world environments and to determine if participants with more consistent preferences could be identified based on profile measures. A total of 52 adults (63–88 years) with hearing varying from normal to a moderate sensorineural hearing loss selected their preferred setting from pairs differing in intensity (3 or 6 dB), gain-frequency slope (±1.3 or ± 2.7 dB/octave), or directionality (omnidirectional vs. cardioid) in four simulated real-world environments: traffic noise, a monologue in traffic noise at 5 dB signal-to-noise ratio, and a dialogue in café noise at 5 and at 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio. Forced-choice comparisons were made 10 times for each combination of pairs of settings and environment. Participants also completed nine psychoacoustic, cognitive, and personality measures. Consistency of preference, defined by a setting preferred at least 9 out of 10 times, varied across participants. More participants obtained consistent preferences for larger differences between settings and less difficult environments. The profile measures did not predict consistency of preference. Trainable aid users could benefit from counselling to ensure realistic expectations for particular adjustments and listening situations.

scholarly journals Research on Speaker Recognition of DRNN in Different Noise Environment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
chaofeng lan ◽  
yuanyuan Zhang ◽  
hongyun Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Recurrent Neural Network ◽  
Speaker Recognition ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Recognition Rate ◽  
Noisy Environment ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Noise Ratio ◽  
Improved Model

Abstract This paper draws on the training method of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN), By increasing the number of hidden layers of RNN and changing the layer activation function from traditional Sigmoid to Leaky ReLU on the input layer, the first group and the last set of data are zero-padded to enhance the effective utilization of data such that the improved reduction model of Denoise Recurrent Neural Network (DRNN) with high calculation speed and good convergence is constructed to solve the problem of low speaker recognition rate in noisy environment. According to this model, the random semantic speech signal with a sampling rate of 16 kHz and a duration of 5 seconds in the speech library is studied. The experimental settings of the signal-to-noise ratios are − 10dB, -5dB, 0dB, 5dB, 10dB, 15dB, 20dB, 25dB. In the noisy environment, the improved model is used to denoise the Mel Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCC) and the Gammatone Frequency Cepstral Coefficents (GFCC), impact of the traditional model and the improved model on the speech recognition rate is analyzed. The research shows that the improved model can effectively eliminate the noise of the feature parameters and improve the speech recognition rate. When the signal-to-noise ratio is low, the speaker recognition rate can be more obvious. Furthermore, when the signal-to-noise ratio is 0dB, the speaker recognition rate of people is increased by 40%, which can be 85% improved compared with the traditional speech model. On the other hand, with the increase in the signal-to-noise ratio, the recognition rate is gradually increased. When the signal-to-noise ratio is 15dB, the recognition rate of speakers is 93%.

The Effects of Changes in Head Angle on Auditory and Visual Input for Omnidirectional and Directional Microphone Hearing Aids

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Henry ◽  
Todd Ricketts
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Increase Signal Intensity ◽  
Visual Mode

Improving the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for individuals with hearing loss who are listening to speech in noise provides an obvious benefit. Although binaural hearing provides the greatest advantage over monaural hearing in noise, some individuals with symmetrical hearing loss choose to wear only one hearing aid. The present study tested the hypothesis that individuals with symmetrical hearing loss fit with one hearing aid would demonstrate improved speech recognition in background noise with increases in head turn. Fourteen individuals were fit monaurally with a Starkey Gemini in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid with directional and omnidirectional microphone modes. Speech recognition performance in noise was tested using the audiovisual version of the Connected Speech Test (CST v.3). The test was administered in auditory-only conditions as well as with the addition of visual cues for each of three head angles: 0°, 20°, and 40°. Results indicated improvement in speech recognition performance with changes in head angle for the auditory-only presentation mode at the 20° and 40° head angles when compared to 0°. Improvement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 20° head angle when compared to 0°. Additionally, a decrement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 40° head angle when compared to 0°. These results support a speech recognition advantage for listeners fit with one ITE hearing aid listening in a close listener-to-speaker distance when they turn their head slightly in order to increase signal intensity.

Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

2004 ◽  
Vol 116 (4) ◽  
pp. 2395-2405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mead C. Killion ◽  
Patricia A. Niquette ◽  
Gail I. Gudmundsen ◽  
Lawrence J. Revit ◽  
Shilpi Banerjee
Keyword(s):  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Noise Ratio ◽  
Measuring Signal

Are Two Ears Not Better Than One?

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (03) ◽  
pp. 171-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel A. McArdle ◽  
Mead Killion ◽  
Monica A. Mennite ◽  
Theresa H. Chisolm
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Analysis Experiment ◽  
Insert Earphones ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: The decision to fit one or two hearing aids in individuals with binaural hearing loss has been debated for years. Although some 78% of U.S. hearing aid fittings are binaural (Kochkin , 2010), Walden and Walden (2005) presented data showing that 82% (23 of 28 patients) of their sample obtained significantly better speech recognition in noise scores when wearing one hearing aid as opposed to two. Purpose: To conduct two new experiments to fuel the monaural/binaural debate. The first experiment was a replication of Walden and Walden (2005), whereas the second experiment examined the use of binaural cues to improve speech recognition in noise. Research Design: A repeated measures experimental design. Study Sample: Twenty veterans (aged 59–85 yr), with mild to moderately severe binaurally symmetrical hearing loss who wore binaural hearing aids were recruited from the Audiology Department at the Bay Pines VA Healthcare System. Data Collection and Analysis: Experiment 1 followed the procedures of the Walden and Walden study, where signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss was measured using the Quick Speech-in-Noise (QuickSIN) test on participants who were aided with their current hearing aids. Signal and noise were presented in the sound booth at 0° azimuth under five test conditions: (1) right ear aided, (2) left ear aided, (3) both ears aided, (4) right ear aided, left ear plugged, and (5) unaided. The opposite ear in (1) and (2) was left open. In Experiment 2, binaural Knowles Electronics Manikin for Acoustic Research (KEMAR) manikin recordings made in Lou Malnati's pizza restaurant during a busy period provided a typical real-world noise, while prerecorded target sentences were presented through a small loudspeaker located in front of the KEMAR manikin. Subjects listened to the resulting binaural recordings through insert earphones under the following four conditions: (1) binaural, (2) diotic, (3) monaural left, and (4) monaural right. Results: Results of repeated measures ANOVAs demonstrated that the best speech recognition in noise performance was obtained by most participants with both ears aided in Experiment 1 and in the binaural condition in Experiment 2. Conclusions: In both experiments, only 20% of our subjects did better in noise with a single ear, roughly similar to the earlier Jerger et al (1993) finding that 8–10% of elderly hearing aid users preferred one hearing aid.

A Test to Measure Subjective and Objective Speech Intelligibility

2002 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 038-049 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle H. Saunders ◽  
Kathleen M. Cienkowski
Keyword(s):  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Clinical Tool ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Speech Reception ◽  
Measurement Signal ◽  
Perceptual Performance ◽  
Noise Ratio ◽  
Performance Discrepancy

Measurement of hearing aid outcome is particularly difficult because there are numerous dimensions to consider (e.g., performance, satisfaction, benefit). Often there are discrepancies between scores in these dimensions. It is difficult to reconcile these discrepancies because the materials and formats used to measure each dimension are so very different. We report data obtained with an outcome measure that examines both objective and subjective dimensions with the same test format and materials and gives results in the same unit of measurement (signal-to-noise ratio). Two variables are measured: a “performance” speech reception threshold and a “perceptual” speech reception threshold. The signal-to-noise ratio difference between these is computed to determine the perceptual-performance discrepancy (PPDIS). The results showed that, on average, 48 percent of the variance in subjective ratings of a hearing aid could be explained by a combination of the performance speech reception threshold and the PPDIS. These findings suggest that the measure is potentially a valuable clinical tool.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document