Visible speech Cues and sndhi variation rules in french

1979 ◽  
pp. 1039
Author(s):  
Simon Belasco
Keyword(s):  
Visible Speech ◽  
Speech Cues

Auditory and Auditory-Visual Perception of Clear and Conversational Speech

1997 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 432-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen S. Helfer
Keyword(s):  
Visual Cues ◽  
Presentation Mode ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Visual Speech ◽  
Conversational Speech ◽  
Clear Speech ◽  
Nature Of Information ◽  
Speech Cues ◽  
Visual Speech Information ◽  
Speech Information

Research has shown that speaking in a deliberately clear manner can improve the accuracy of auditory speech recognition. Allowing listeners access to visual speech cues also enhances speech understanding. Whether the nature of information provided by speaking clearly and by using visual speech cues is redundant has not been determined. This study examined how speaking mode (clear vs. conversational) and presentation mode (auditory vs. auditory-visual) influenced the perception of words within nonsense sentences. In Experiment 1, 30 young listeners with normal hearing responded to videotaped stimuli presented audiovisually in the presence of background noise at one of three signal-to-noise ratios. In Experiment 2, 9 participants returned for an additional assessment using auditory-only presentation. Results of these experiments showed significant effects of speaking mode (clear speech was easier to understand than was conversational speech) and presentation mode (auditoryvisual presentation led to better performance than did auditory-only presentation). The benefit of clear speech was greater for words occurring in the middle of sentences than for words at either the beginning or end of sentences for both auditory-only and auditory-visual presentation, whereas the greatest benefit from supplying visual cues was for words at the end of sentences spoken both clearly and conversationally. The total benefit from speaking clearly and supplying visual cues was equal to the sum of each of these effects. Overall, the results suggest that speaking clearly and providing visual speech information provide complementary (rather than redundant) information.

Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease Benefit From Audiovisual Speech Cues and Supportive Sentence Context

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Alexandre Chauvin ◽  
Shari Baum ◽  
Natalie A. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Sentence Context ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Healthy Older Adults ◽  
Speech Cues

Purpose Speech perception in noise becomes difficult with age but can be facilitated by audiovisual (AV) speech cues and sentence context in healthy older adults. However, individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) may present with deficits in AV integration, potentially limiting the extent to which they can benefit from AV cues. This study investigated the benefit of these cues in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), individuals with AD, and healthy older adult controls. Method This study compared auditory-only and AV speech perception of sentences presented in noise. These sentences had one of two levels of context: high (e.g., “Stir your coffee with a spoon”) and low (e.g., “Bob didn't think about the spoon”). Fourteen older controls ( M age = 72.71 years, SD = 9.39), 13 individuals with MCI ( M age = 79.92 years, SD = 5.52), and nine individuals with probable Alzheimer's-type dementia ( M age = 79.38 years, SD = 3.40) completed the speech perception task and were asked to repeat the terminal word of each sentence. Results All three groups benefited (i.e., identified more terminal words) from AV and sentence context. Individuals with MCI showed a smaller AV benefit compared to controls in low-context conditions, suggesting difficulties with AV integration. Individuals with AD showed a smaller benefit in high-context conditions compared to controls, indicating difficulties with AV integration and context use in AD. Conclusions Individuals with MCI and individuals with AD do benefit from AV speech and semantic context during speech perception in noise (albeit to a lower extent than healthy older adults). This suggests that engaging in face-to-face communication and providing ample context will likely foster more effective communication between patients and caregivers, professionals, and loved ones.

Binaural Perception in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users with Unrestricted or Restricted Acoustic Hearing in the Non-Implanted Ear

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 187-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Dorbeau ◽  
John Galvin ◽  
Qian-Jie Fu ◽  
Elsa Legris ◽  
Mathieu Marx ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Tinnitus Severity ◽  
Speech Understanding In Noise ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Acoustic Hearing ◽  
Speech Cues ◽  
Contralateral Ear ◽  
Speech Reception Thresholds ◽  
One Year ◽  
Single Sided Deafness

Cochlear implantation (CI) can benefit patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of sound localization, speech understanding in noise, tinnitus severity, and quality of life (QoL). In previous studies, CI outcomes have been largely reported for SSD patients with normal “unrestricted” hearing in the contralateral ear. However, SSD patients may often have some degree of hearing loss in the contralateral ear (“restricted” acoustic hearing). In this study, we report results from a French clinical trial for CI in in SSD patients (NCT02204618). Localization, speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in noise, tinnitus severity, and QoL were evaluated in 18 SSD patients 1 year after CI. Data were analyzed for 2 subject groups according to the pure-tone average thresholds in the non-implanted ear: unrestricted acoustic hearing (UNRES; ≤25 dB HL; n = 10) and restricted acoustic hearing (RES; > 25 dB HL; n = 8). Across all subjects, localization was significantly better with the CI on than off (p = 0.005); there was no significant difference between subject groups (p = 0.301). When speech and noise were co-located (S0N0), there was no significant difference in SRTs with the CI on or off (p = 0.480); SRTs were significantly better for the UNRES than for the RES group (p = 0.005). When speech and noise were spatially separated (SCINNH), SRTs were significantly better with the CI on than off (p < 0.001). While SRTs were better for the UNRES than for the RES group (p = 0.024), the CI benefit was more than 50% greater for the RES group due to the restoration of high-frequency speech cues. Questionnaire data showed that tinnitus severity was significantly reduced (p = 0.045) and QoL was significantly improved after one year of experience with the CI (p < 0.001). Age at testing was significantly correlated with SRTs for the S0N0 condition; duration of deafness was correlated with SRTs for the SCINNH condition. There were relatively few correlations between behavioral and subjective measures, suggesting that both were valuable when assessing CI benefits for SSD patients. The present data suggest that indications for CI should be expanded to include unilaterally deaf patients who have normal hearing or mild-to-moderate hearing loss in the non-implanted ear.

VISIBLE SPEECH

The Lancet ◽  
1948 ◽  
Vol 251 (6490) ◽  
pp. 110
Keyword(s):  
Visible Speech
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document