The effects of interaural level differences on binaural fusion in normal-hearing listeners

2018 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 1815-1815
Author(s):  
Bess Glickman ◽  
Yonghee Oh ◽  
Lina Reiss
Keyword(s):  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Interaural Level Differences

scholarly journals Head Shadow, Summation, and Squelch in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users With Linked Automatic Gain Controls

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 233121652110181
Author(s):  
Taylor A. Bakal ◽  
Kristina DeRoy Milvae ◽  
Chen Chen ◽  
Matthew J. Goupell
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Functional Performance ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Functional Asymmetry ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Speech Understanding In Noise ◽  
Bilateral Cochlear Implant ◽  
Automatic Gain Controls ◽  
Interaural Level Differences

Speech understanding in noise is poorer in bilateral cochlear-implant (BICI) users compared to normal-hearing counterparts. Independent automatic gain controls (AGCs) may contribute to this because adjusting processor gain independently can reduce interaural level differences that BICI listeners rely on for bilateral benefits. Bilaterally linked AGCs may improve bilateral benefits by increasing the magnitude of interaural level differences. The effects of linked AGCs on bilateral benefits (summation, head shadow, and squelch) were measured in nine BICI users. Speech understanding for a target talker at 0° masked by a single talker at 0°, 90°, or −90° azimuth was assessed under headphones with sentences at five target-to-masker ratios. Research processors were used to manipulate AGC type (independent or linked) and test ear (left, right, or both). Sentence recall was measured in quiet to quantify individual interaural asymmetry in functional performance. The results showed that AGC type did not significantly change performance or bilateral benefits. Interaural functional asymmetries, however, interacted with ear such that greater summation and squelch benefit occurred when there was larger functional asymmetry, and interacted with interferer location such that smaller head shadow benefit occurred when there was larger functional asymmetry. The larger benefits for those with larger asymmetry were driven by improvements from adding a better-performing ear, rather than a true binaural-hearing benefit. In summary, linked AGCs did not significantly change bilateral benefits in cases of speech-on-speech masking with a single-talker masker, but there was also no strong detriment across a range of target-to-masker ratios, within a small and diverse BICI listener population.

scholarly journals Cochlear implant patients’ localization using interaural level differences exceeds that of untrained normal hearing listeners

2012 ◽  
Vol 131 (5) ◽  
pp. EL382-EL387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin M. Aronoff ◽  
Daniel J. Freed ◽  
Laurel M. Fisher ◽  
Ivan Pal ◽  
Sigfrid D. Soli
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Interaural Level Differences

Spectral Contributions to the Benefit From Spatial Separation of Speech and Noise

2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1297-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy R. Dubno ◽  
Jayne B. Ahlstrom ◽  
Amy R. Horwitz
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cutoff Frequency ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Sources ◽  
Low Pass ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Interaural Level Differences ◽  
High Pass

Speech recognition in noise improves when speech and noise sources are separated in space. This benefit has two components whose effects are strongest in different frequency regions: (1) interaural level differences (e.g., head shadow), which are largest at higher frequencies, and (2) interaural time differences, which have their greatest contribution at lower frequencies. Binaural interactions enhance the separation of signals from noise through the use of these interaural differences. Here, the benefit attributable to spatial separation was measured as a function of the low- and high-pass cutoff frequency of speech and noise. Listeners were younger adults with normal hearing, older adults with normal hearing, and older adults with hearing loss. Binaural thresholds for narrowband noises were measured in quiet and in a speech-shaped masker as a function of masker low-pass cutoff frequency. Speech levels corresponding to 50% correct recognition of sentences from the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) were measured in a 65-dB SPL speech-shaped noise. Thresholds for narrowband noises and for speech were measured with two loudspeaker configurations: (1) signals and speech-shaped noise at 0° azimuth (in front of the listener) and (2) signals at 0° azimuth and speech-shaped noise at 90° azimuth (at the listener's side). The criterion measure was spatial separation benefit, or the difference in thresholds for the two conditions. Benefit of spatial separation for unfiltered speech averaged 6.1 dB for younger listeners with normal hearing, 4.9 dB for older listeners with normal hearing, and 2.7 dB for older listeners with hearing loss. Benefit was differentially affected by low-pass and high-pass filtering, suggesting a trade-off of the contributions of higher frequency interaural level differences and lower frequency interaural timing cues. As expected, older listeners with hearing loss benefited little from the improved signal-to-noise ratios in the higher frequencies resulting from head shadow, but showed some benefit from lower frequency cues. Spatial benefit for older listeners with normal hearing was reduced relative to benefit for younger listeners. This result may be related to older listeners' elevated thresholds at frequencies above 6.0 kHz.

A Questionnaire Survey of Current Rehabilitation Practices for Adults With Normal Hearing Sensitivity Who Experience Auditory Difficulties

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 738-761
Author(s):  
Tess K. Koerner ◽  
Melissa A. Papesh ◽  
Frederick J. Gallun
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Questionnaire Survey ◽  
Patient Population ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Training Methods ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Considerable Benefit ◽  
High Level

Purpose A questionnaire survey was conducted to collect information from clinical audiologists about rehabilitation options for adult patients who report significant auditory difficulties despite having normal or near-normal hearing sensitivity. This work aimed to provide more information about what audiologists are currently doing in the clinic to manage auditory difficulties in this patient population and their views on the efficacy of recommended rehabilitation methods. Method A questionnaire survey containing multiple-choice and open-ended questions was developed and disseminated online. Invitations to participate were delivered via e-mail listservs and through business cards provided at annual audiology conferences. All responses were anonymous at the time of data collection. Results Responses were collected from 209 participants. The majority of participants reported seeing at least one normal-hearing patient per month who reported significant communication difficulties. However, few respondents indicated that their location had specific protocols for the treatment of these patients. Counseling was reported as the most frequent rehabilitation method, but results revealed that audiologists across various work settings are also successfully starting to fit patients with mild-gain hearing aids. Responses indicated that patient compliance with computer-based auditory training methods was regarded as low, with patients generally preferring device-based rehabilitation options. Conclusions Results from this questionnaire survey strongly suggest that audiologists frequently see normal-hearing patients who report auditory difficulties, but that few clinicians are equipped with established protocols for diagnosis and management. While many feel that mild-gain hearing aids provide considerable benefit for these patients, very little research has been conducted to date to support the use of hearing aids or other rehabilitation options for this unique patient population. This study reveals the critical need for additional research to establish evidence-based practice guidelines that will empower clinicians to provide a high level of clinical care and effective rehabilitation strategies to these patients.

Adaptation of the Connected Speech Test: Rerecording and Passage Equivalency

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hasan K. Saleh ◽  
Paula Folkeard ◽  
Ewan Macpherson ◽  
Susan Scollie
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
North American ◽  
First Language ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Connected Speech ◽  
Internal Reliability ◽  
Speech Test ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Unit Standard

Purpose The original Connected Speech Test (CST; Cox et al., 1987) is a well-regarded and often utilized speech perception test. The aim of this study was to develop a new version of the CST using a neutral North American accent and to assess the use of this updated CST on participants with normal hearing. Method A female English speaker was recruited to read the original CST passages, which were recorded as the new CST stimuli. A study was designed to assess the newly recorded CST passages' equivalence and conduct normalization. The study included 19 Western University students (11 females and eight males) with normal hearing and with English as a first language. Results Raw scores for the 48 tested passages were converted to rationalized arcsine units, and average passage scores more than 1 rationalized arcsine unit standard deviation from the mean were excluded. The internal reliability of the 32 remaining passages was assessed, and the two-way random effects intraclass correlation was .944. Conclusion The aim of our study was to create new CST stimuli with a more general North American accent in order to minimize accent effects on the speech perception scores. The study resulted in 32 passages of equivalent difficulty for listeners with normal hearing.

Personal Audio System: Hearing Symptoms, Habits, and Sound Pressure Levels Measured in Real Ear and a Manikin

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 2016-2026
Author(s):  
Tamara R. Almeida ◽  
Clayton H. Rocha ◽  
Camila M. Rabelo ◽  
Raquel F. Gomes ◽  
Ivone F. Neves-Lobo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sound Pressure ◽  
Daily Basis ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Real ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sound Pressure Levels ◽  
Audio System

Purpose The aims of this study were to characterize hearing symptoms, habits, and sound pressure levels (SPLs) of personal audio system (PAS) used by young adults; estimate the risk of developing hearing loss and assess whether instructions given to users led to behavioral changes; and propose recommendations for PAS users. Method A cross-sectional study was performed in 50 subjects with normal hearing. Procedures included questionnaire and measurement of PAS SPLs (real ear and manikin) through the users' own headphones and devices while they listened to four songs. After 1 year, 30 subjects answered questions about their usage habits. For the statistical analysis, one-way analysis of variance, Tukey's post hoc test, Lin and Spearman coefficients, the chi-square test, and logistic regression were used. Results Most subjects listened to music every day, usually in noisy environments. Sixty percent of the subjects reported hearing symptoms after using a PAS. Substantial variability in the equivalent music listening level (Leq) was noted ( M = 84.7 dBA; min = 65.1 dBA, max = 97.5 dBA). A significant difference was found only in the 4-kHz band when comparing the real-ear and manikin techniques. Based on the Leq, 38% of the individuals exceeded the maximum daily time allowance. Comparison of the subjects according to the maximum allowed daily exposure time revealed a higher number of hearing complaints from people with greater exposure. After 1 year, 43% of the subjects reduced their usage time, and 70% reduced the volume. A volume not exceeding 80% was recommended, and at this volume, the maximum usage time should be 160 min. Conclusions The habit of listening to music at high intensities on a daily basis seems to cause hearing symptoms, even in individuals with normal hearing. The real-ear and manikin techniques produced similar results. Providing instructions on this topic combined with measuring PAS SPLs may be an appropriate strategy for raising the awareness of people who are at risk. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12431435

Use of a Mild-Gain Hearing Aid by Middle-Age Normal-Hearing Adults Who Do and Do Not Self-Report Trouble Hearing in Background Noise

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Jasleen Singh ◽  
Karen A. Doherty
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Middle Age ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Hearing Problems

Purpose The aim of the study was to assess how the use of a mild-gain hearing aid can affect hearing handicap, motivation, and attitudes toward hearing aids for middle-age, normal-hearing adults who do and do not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Method A total of 20 participants (45–60 years of age) with clinically normal-hearing thresholds (< 25 dB HL) were enrolled in this study. Ten self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise, and 10 did not self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. All participants were fit with mild-gain hearing aids, bilaterally, and were asked to wear them for 2 weeks. Hearing handicap, attitudes toward hearing aids and hearing loss, and motivation to address hearing problems were evaluated before and after participants wore the hearing aids. Participants were also asked if they would consider purchasing a hearing aid before and after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Results After wearing the hearing aids for 2 weeks, hearing handicap scores decreased for the participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise. No changes in hearing handicap scores were observed for the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. The participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise also reported greater personal distress from their hearing problems, were more motivated to address their hearing problems, and had higher levels of hearing handicap compared to the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Only 20% (2/10) of the participants who self-reported trouble hearing in background noise reported that they would consider purchasing a hearing aid after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Conclusions The use of mild-gain hearing aids has the potential to reduce hearing handicap for normal-hearing, middle-age adults who self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. However, this may not be the most appropriate treatment option for their current hearing problems given that only 20% of these participants would consider purchasing a hearing aid after wearing hearing aids for 2 weeks.

An Eye-Tracking Study on Audiovisual Speech Perception Strategies Adopted by Normal-Hearing and Deaf Adults Under Different Language Familiarities

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 2245-2254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianrong Wang ◽  
Yumeng Zhu ◽  
Yu Chen ◽  
Abdilbar Mamat ◽  
Mei Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Audiovisual Speech ◽  
Audiovisual Speech Perception ◽  
Allocation Pattern ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Bilingual Speaker ◽  
Primary Hypothesis ◽  
Standard Chinese

Purpose The primary purpose of this study was to explore the audiovisual speech perception strategies.80.23.47 adopted by normal-hearing and deaf people in processing familiar and unfamiliar languages. Our primary hypothesis was that they would adopt different perception strategies due to different sensory experiences at an early age, limitations of the physical device, and the developmental gap of language, and others. Method Thirty normal-hearing adults and 33 prelingually deaf adults participated in the study. They were asked to perform judgment and listening tasks while watching videos of a Uygur–Mandarin bilingual speaker in a familiar language (Standard Chinese) or an unfamiliar language (Modern Uygur) while their eye movements were recorded by eye-tracking technology. Results Task had a slight influence on the distribution of selective attention, whereas subject and language had significant influences. To be specific, the normal-hearing and the d10eaf participants mainly gazed at the speaker's eyes and mouth, respectively, in the experiment; moreover, while the normal-hearing participants had to stare longer at the speaker's mouth when they confronted with the unfamiliar language Modern Uygur, the deaf participant did not change their attention allocation pattern when perceiving the two languages. Conclusions Normal-hearing and deaf adults adopt different audiovisual speech perception strategies: Normal-hearing adults mainly look at the eyes, and deaf adults mainly look at the mouth. Additionally, language and task can also modulate the speech perception strategy.

Auditory Gating and Extended High-Frequency Thresholds in Normal-Hearing Adults With Minimal Tinnitus

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1S) ◽  
pp. 209-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Campbell ◽  
Alison LaBrec ◽  
Connor Bean ◽  
Mashhood Nielsen ◽  
Won So
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Auditory Gating

When Hearing Does Not Mean Understanding: On the Neural Processing of Syntactically Complex Sentences by Listeners With Hearing Loss

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Margreet Vogelzang ◽  
Christiane M. Thiel ◽  
Stephanie Rosemann ◽  
Jochem W. Rieger ◽  
Esther Ruigendijk
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Secondary Task ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Cognitive Demands ◽  
Sentence Complexity ◽  
Complex Sentences ◽  
And Task

Purpose Adults with mild-to-moderate age-related hearing loss typically exhibit issues with speech understanding, but their processing of syntactically complex sentences is not well understood. We test the hypothesis that listeners with hearing loss' difficulties with comprehension and processing of syntactically complex sentences are due to the processing of degraded input interfering with the successful processing of complex sentences. Method We performed a neuroimaging study with a sentence comprehension task, varying sentence complexity (through subject–object order and verb–arguments order) and cognitive demands (presence or absence of a secondary task) within subjects. Groups of older subjects with hearing loss ( n = 20) and age-matched normal-hearing controls ( n = 20) were tested. Results The comprehension data show effects of syntactic complexity and hearing ability, with normal-hearing controls outperforming listeners with hearing loss, seemingly more so on syntactically complex sentences. The secondary task did not influence off-line comprehension. The imaging data show effects of group, sentence complexity, and task, with listeners with hearing loss showing decreased activation in typical speech processing areas, such as the inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus. No interactions between group, sentence complexity, and task were found in the neuroimaging data. Conclusions The results suggest that listeners with hearing loss process speech differently from their normal-hearing peers, possibly due to the increased demands of processing degraded auditory input. Increased cognitive demands by means of a secondary visual shape processing task influence neural sentence processing, but no evidence was found that it does so in a different way for listeners with hearing loss and normal-hearing listeners.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document