scholarly journals The Relationship between Random Gap Detection and Hearing in Noise Test Performances

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 948-954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paige Heeke ◽  
Andrew J. Vermiglio ◽  
Emery Bulla ◽  
Keerthana Velappan ◽  
Xiangming Fang
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Temporal Resolution ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Gap Detection ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Noise Performance ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractTemporal acoustic cues are particularly important for speech understanding, and past research has inferred a relationship between temporal resolution and speech recognition in noise ability. A temporal resolution disorder is thought to affect speech understanding abilities because persons would not be able to accurately encode these frequency transitions, creating speech discrimination errors even in the presence of normal pure-tone hearing.The primary purpose was to investigate the relationship between temporal resolution as measured by the Random Gap Detection Test (RGDT) and speech recognition in noise performance as measured by the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) in adults with normal audiometric thresholds. The second purpose was to examine the relationship between temporal resolution and spatial release from masking.The HINT and RGDT protocols were administered under headphones according to the guidelines specified by the developers. The HINT uses an adaptive protocol to determine the signal-to-noise ratio where the participant recognizes 50% of the sentences. For HINT conditions, the target sentences were presented at 0° and the steady-state speech-shaped noise and a four-talker babble (4TB) was presented at 0°, +90°, or −90° for noise front, noise right, and noise left conditions, respectively. The RGDT is used to evaluate temporal resolution by determining the smallest time interval between two matching stimuli that can be detected by the participant. The RGDT threshold is the shortest time interval where the participant detects a gap. Tonal (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) and click stimuli random gap subtests were presented at 60 dB HL. Tonal subtests were presented in a random order to minimize presentation order effects.Twenty-one young, native English-speaking participants with normal pure-tone thresholds (≤25 dB HL for 500–4000 Hz) participated in this study. The average age of the participants was 20.2 years (SD = 0.66).Spearman rho correlation coefficients were conducted using SPSS 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) to determine the relationships between HINT and RGDT thresholds and derived measures (spatial advantage and composite scores). Nonparametric testing was used because of the ordinal nature of RGDT data.Moderate negative correlations (p < 0.05) were found between eight RGDT and HINT threshold measures and a moderate positive correlation (p < 0.05) was found between RGDT click thresholds and HINT 4TB spatial advantage. This suggests that as temporal resolution abilities worsened, speech recognition in noise performance improved. These correlations were not statistically significant after the p value reflected the Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.The results of the present study imply that the RGDT and HINT use different temporal processes. Performance on the RGDT cannot be predicted from HINT thresholds or vice versa.

scholarly journals Comparison of Clinical and Traditional Gap Detection Tests

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (06) ◽  
pp. 540-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Hoover ◽  
Lauren Pasquesi ◽  
Pamela Souza
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Temporal Resolution ◽  
Gap Detection ◽  
Clinical Tests ◽  
Younger Adults ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
The Relationship

Background: Temporal resolution is important for speech recognition and may contribute to variability in speech recognition among patients. Clinical tests of temporal resolution are available, but it is not clear how closely results of those tests correspond to results of traditional temporal resolution tests. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the Gaps-in-Noise (GIN) test to a traditional measure of gap detection. Study Sample: This study included older adults with hearing loss and younger adults with normal hearing. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants completed one practice and two test blocks of each gap detection test, and a measure of speech-in-noise recognition. Individual data were correlated to examine the relationship between the tests. Results: The GIN and traditional gap detection were significantly, but not highly correlated. The traditional gap detection test contributed to variance in speech recognition in noise, while the GIN did not. Conclusions: The brevity and ease of implementing the GIN in the clinic make it a viable test of temporal resolution. However, it differs from traditional measures in implementation, and as a result relies on different cognitive factors. The GIN thresholds should be interpreted carefully and not presumed to represent an approximation of traditional gap detection thresholds.

The Relationship between High-Frequency Pure-Tone Hearing Loss, Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) Thresholds, and the Articulation Index

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 779-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vermiglio ◽  
Sigfrid D. Soli ◽  
Daniel J. Freed ◽  
Laurel M. Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Hearing Ability ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
Articulation Index ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Pure Tone Threshold

Background: Speech recognition in noise testing has been conducted at least since the 1940s (Dickson et al, 1946). The ability to recognize speech in noise is a distinct function of the auditory system (Plomp, 1978). According to Kochkin (2002), difficulty recognizing speech in noise is the primary complaint of hearing aid users. However, speech recognition in noise testing has not found widespread use in the field of audiology (Mueller, 2003; Strom, 2003; Tannenbaum and Rosenfeld, 1996). The audiogram has been used as the “gold standard” for hearing ability. However, the audiogram is a poor indicator of speech recognition in noise ability. Purpose: This study investigates the relationship between pure-tone thresholds, the articulation index, and the ability to recognize speech in quiet and in noise. Research Design: Pure-tone thresholds were measured for audiometric frequencies 250–6000 Hz. Pure-tone threshold groups were created. These included a normal threshold group and slight, mild, severe, and profound high-frequency pure-tone threshold groups. Speech recognition thresholds in quiet and in noise were obtained using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) (Nilsson et al, 1994; Vermiglio, 2008). The articulation index was determined by using Pavlovic's method with pure-tone thresholds (Pavlovic, 1989, 1991). Study Sample: Two hundred seventy-eight participants were tested. All participants were native speakers of American English. Sixty-three of the original participants were removed in order to create groups of participants with normal low-frequency pure-tone thresholds and relatively symmetrical high-frequency pure-tone threshold groups. The final set of 215 participants had a mean age of 33 yr with a range of 17–59 yr. Data Collection and Analysis: Pure-tone threshold data were collected using the Hughson-Weslake procedure. Speech recognition data were collected using a Windows-based HINT software system. Statistical analyses were conducted using descriptive, correlational, and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) statistics. Results: The MANCOVA analysis (where the effect of age was statistically removed) indicated that there were no significant differences in HINT performances between groups of participants with normal audiograms and those groups with slight, mild, moderate, or severe high-frequency hearing losses. With all of the data combined across groups, correlational analyses revealed significant correlations between pure-tone averages and speech recognition in quiet performance. Nonsignificant or significant but weak correlations were found between pure-tone averages and HINT thresholds. Conclusions: The ability to recognize speech in steady-state noise cannot be predicted from the audiogram. A new classification scheme of hearing impairment based on the audiogram and the speech reception in noise thresholds, as measured with the HINT, may be useful for the characterization of the hearing ability in the global sense. This classification scheme is consistent with Plomp's two aspects of hearing ability (Plomp, 1978).

scholarly journals Within-Frequency Temporal Processing and Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Recipients and Normal Hearing Listeners

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelsea Blankenship ◽  
Jareen Meinzen-Derr ◽  
Fawen Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Correlation Analysis ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Temporal Resolution ◽  
Temporal Processing ◽  
Gap Detection ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Noise Test

ABSTRACT Objective: Speech recognition performance among cochlear implant (CI) recipients is highly variable and is influenced by their ability to perceive rapid changes within the acoustic signal (i.e., temporal resolution). A behavioral gap detection test is commonly used to assess temporal processing however it requires active participation, and therefore may be infeasible for young children and individuals with disabilities. Alternatively, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) can be elicited by a silent gap embedded in a longer duration stimulus and have been used as an objective measure of temporal resolution. Only a few studies have examined within-frequency gap detection (identical pre- and post-gap frequency), most of which were conducted with normal hearing (NH) individuals and did not include speech perception. The purpose of the study is to evaluate behavioral and electrophysiological measures of within-frequency temporal processing and speech perception in NH and CI recipients. Design: Eleven post-lingually deafened adult CI recipients (n = 15 ears; mean age = 50.4 yrs.) and eleven age- and gender-matched NH individuals (n = 15 ears; mean age = 49.0 yrs.) were recruited. Speech perception was assessed with the CNC word test, AzBio sentence test, and BKB Speech-in-Noise test. Within-frequency (2 kHz pre- and post-gap tone) behavioral gap detection thresholds (GDT) were measured using an adaptive, two-alternative, forced-choice paradigm. Within-frequency CAEPs were measured using four gap duration conditions based on the individual's behavioral GDT including a supra-threshold (GDTx3), threshold (GDT), sub-threshold (GDT/3), and reference (no gap) condition. Mixed effect models examined group differences in speech perception, behavioral GDTs, and CAEP amplitude and latency. Correlation analyses examined the relationship between the CAEP response, behavioral measures of speech perception and temporal processing, and demographic factors. Results: CI recipients had significantly poorer speech perception scores with no significant differences in behavioral within-frequency GDTs compared to NH participants. CI recipients had poorer CAEP waveform morphology, smaller N1, larger P2 amplitude, and increased P1 latency compared to NH participants. Additionally, older participants displayed smaller N1-P2 amplitude compared to younger participants. Bivariate group correlation analysis showed that individuals with poorer within-frequency GDTs displayed significantly poorer performance on the AzBio sentences in noise and BKB Speech-in-Noise test. Multivariate canonical correlation analysis showed a significant relationship between the within-frequency CAEP amplitude and latency and behavioral measures of speech perception and temporal processing. Conclusions: CI recipients had poorer speech understanding in quiet and noise yet similar behavioral GDTs compared to NH participants. NH participants showed the anticipated trend of increased N1-P2 amplitude as CAEP gap duration increased. However, CAEP amplitude and latency remained relatively stable across gap duration conditions for CI recipients. Instead, significant group and age effects for CAEP peak amplitude and latency were found that can likely be attributed to differences in cortical neuron density, adaptation, and recovery between the groups. Lastly correlation analysis indicates that individuals with poorer temporal processing are likely to have adequate speech perception in quiet but worse speech understanding in noise.

Speech Recognition Abilities of Adults Using Cochlear Implants with FM Systems

2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 678-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin C. Schafer ◽  
Linda M. Thibodeau
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
Percent Correct ◽  
Word Repetition ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Speech recognition was evaluated for ten adults with normal hearing and eight adults with Nucleus cochlear implants (CIs) at several different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and with three frequency modulated (FM) system arrangements: desktop, body worn, and miniature direct connect. Participants were asked to repeat Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) sentences presented with speech noise in a classroom setting and percent correct word repetition was determined. Performance was evaluated for both normal-hearing and CI participants with the desktop soundfield system. In addition, speech recognition for the CI participants was evaluated using two FM systems electrically coupled to their speech processors. When comparing the desktop sound field and the No-FM condition, only the listeners with normal hearing made significant improvements in speech recognition in noise. When comparing the performance across the three FM conditions for the CI listeners, the two electrically coupled FM systems resulted in significantly greater improvements in speech recognition in noise relative to the desktop soundfield system.

Evaluation of Automatic Directional Processing with Cochlear Implant Recipients

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (08) ◽  
pp. 478-486
Author(s):  
Lisa G. Potts ◽  
Soo Jang ◽  
Cory L. Hillis
Keyword(s):  
Signal Processing ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Dynamic Range ◽  
Individual Variability ◽  
Noise Performance ◽  
Mixed Model Analysis ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Abstract Background For cochlear implant (CI) recipients, speech recognition in noise is consistently poorer compared with recognition in quiet. Directional processing improves performance in noise and can be automatically activated based on acoustic scene analysis. The use of adaptive directionality with CI recipients is new and has not been investigated thoroughly, especially utilizing the recipients' preferred everyday signal processing, dynamic range, and/or noise reduction. Purpose This study utilized CI recipients' preferred everyday signal processing to evaluate four directional microphone options in a noisy environment to determine which option provides the best speech recognition in noise. A greater understanding of automatic directionality could ultimately improve CI recipients' speech-in-noise performance and better guide clinicians in programming. Study Sample Twenty-six unilateral and seven bilateral CI recipients with a mean age of 66 years and approximately 4 years of CI experience were included. Data Collection and Analysis Speech-in-noise performance was measured using eight loudspeakers in a 360-degree array with HINT sentences presented in restaurant noise. Four directional options were evaluated (automatic [SCAN], adaptive [Beam], fixed [Zoom], and Omni-directional) with participants' everyday use signal processing options active. A mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA) and pairwise comparisons were performed. Results Automatic directionality (SCAN) resulted in the best speech-in-noise performance, although not significantly better than Beam. Omni-directional performance was significantly poorer compared with the three other directional options. A varied number of participants performed their best with each of the four-directional options, with 16 performing best with automatic directionality. The majority of participants did not perform best with their everyday directional option. Conclusion The individual variability seen in this study suggests that CI recipients try with different directional options to find their ideal program. However, based on a CI recipient's motivation to try different programs, automatic directionality is an appropriate everyday processing option.

Efficacy of a Cochlear Implant Simultaneous Analog Stimulation Strategy Coupled with a Monopolar Electrode Configuration

2005 ◽  
Vol 114 (11) ◽  
pp. 886-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Xu ◽  
Teresa A. Zwolan ◽  
Catherine S. Thompson ◽  
Bryan E. Pfingst
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Speech Processing ◽  
Dynamic Range ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Electrode Configuration ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
Noise Test

Objectives: The present study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and clinical feasibility of using monopolar stimulation with the Clarion Simultaneous Analog Stimulation (SAS) strategy in patients with cochlear implants. Methods: Speech recognition by 10 Clarion cochlear implant users was evaluated by means of 4 different speech processing strategy/electrode configuration combinations; ie, SAS and Continuous Interleaved Sampling (CIS) strategies were each used with monopolar (MP) and bipolar (BP) electrode configurations. The test measures included consonants, vowels, consonant-nucleus-consonant words, and Hearing in Noise Test sentences with a +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio. Additionally, subjective judgments of sound quality were obtained for each strategy/configuration combination. Results: All subjects but 1 demonstrated open-set speech recognition with the SAS/MP combination. The group mean Hearing in Noise Test sentence score for the SAS/MP combination was 31.6% (range, 0% to 92%) correct, as compared to 25.0%, 46.7%, and 37.8% correct for the CIS/BP, CIS/MP, and SAS/BP combinations, respectively. Intersubject variability was high, and there were no significant differences in mean speech recognition scores or mean preference ratings among the 4 strategy/configuration combinations tested. Individually, the best speech recognition performance was with the subject's everyday strategy/configuration combination in 72% of the applicable cases. If the everyday strategy was excluded from the analysis, the subjects performed best with the SAS/MP combination in 37.5% of the remaining cases. Conclusions: The SAS processing strategy with an MP electrode configuration gave reasonable speech recognition in most subjects, even though subjects had minimal previous experience with this strategy/configuration combination. The SAS/MP combination might be particularly appropriate for patients for whom a full dynamic range of electrical hearing could not be achieved with a BP configuration.

Evaluation of Speech Recognition in Noise with Cochlear Implants and Dynamic FM

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (07) ◽  
pp. 409-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jace Wolfe ◽  
Erin C. Schafer ◽  
Benjamin Heldner ◽  
Hans Mülder ◽  
Emily Ward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Speech Processor ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: Use of personal frequency-modulated (FM) systems significantly improves speech recognition in noise for users of cochlear implants (CIs). Previous studies have shown that the most appropriate gain setting on the FM receiver may vary based on the listening situation and the manufacturer of the CI system. Unlike traditional FM systems with fixed-gain settings, Dynamic FM automatically varies the gain of the FM receiver with changes in the ambient noise level. There are no published reports describing the benefits of Dynamic FM use for CI recipients or how Dynamic FM performance varies as a function of CI manufacturer. Purpose: To evaluate speech recognition of Advanced Bionics Corporation or Cochlear Corporation CI recipients using Dynamic FM vs. a traditional FM system and to examine the effects of Autosensitivity on the FM performance of Cochlear Corporation recipients. Research Design: A two-group repeated-measures design. Participants were assigned to a group according to their type of CI. Study Sample: Twenty-five subjects, ranging in age from 8 to 82 years, met the inclusion criteria for one or more of the experiments. Thirteen subjects used Advanced Bionics Corporation, and 12 used Cochlear Corporation implants. Intervention: Speech recognition was assessed while subjects used traditional, fixed-gain FM systems and Dynamic FM systems. Data Collection and Analysis: In Experiments 1 and 2, speech recognition was evaluated with a traditional, fixed-gain FM system and a Dynamic FM system using the Hearing in Noise Test sentences in quiet and in classroom noise. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate effects of CI manufacturer (Advanced Bionics and Cochlear Corporation), type of FM system (traditional and dynamic), noise level, and use of Autosensitivity for users of Cochlear Corporation implants. Experiment 3 determined the effects of Autosensitivity on speech recognition of Cochlear Corporation implant recipients when listening through the speech processor microphone with the FM system muted. A repeated-measures ANOVA was used to examine the effects of signal-to-noise ratio and Autosensitivity. Results: In Experiment 1, use of Dynamic FM resulted in better speech recognition in noise for Advanced Bionics recipients relative to traditional FM at noise levels of 65, 70, and 75 dB SPL. Advanced Bionics recipients obtained better speech recognition in noise with FM use when compared to Cochlear Corporation recipients. When Autosensitivity was enabled in Experiment 2, the performance of Cochlear Corporation recipients was equivalent to that of Advanced Bionics recipients, and Dynamic FM was significantly better than traditional FM. Results of Experiment 3 indicate that use of Autosensitivity improves speech recognition in noise of signals directed to the speech processor relative to no Autosensitivity. Conclusions: Dynamic FM should be considered for use with persons with CIs to improve speech recognition in noise. At default CI settings, FM performance is better for Advanced Bionics recipients when compared to Cochlear Corporation recipients, but use of Autosensitivity by Cochlear Corporation users results in equivalent group performance.

scholarly journals Changes of Temporal Processing and Hearing in Noise after Use of a Monoaural Hearing Aid in Patients with Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Preliminary Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 146-151
Author(s):  
Yehree Kim ◽  
Chan Joo Yang ◽  
Myung Hoon Yoo ◽  
Chan Il Song ◽  
Jong Woo Chung
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Resolution ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
One Year ◽  
A Prospective Study ◽  
The Relationship

Background and Objectives: The relationship between hearing aid (HA) use and improvement in cognitive function is not fully known. This study aimed to determine whether HAs could recover temporal resolution or hearing in noise functions.Materials and Methods: We designed a prospective study with two groups: HA users and controls. Patients older than 45 years, with a pure tone average threshold of worse than 40 dB and a speech discrimination score better than 60% in both ears were eligible. Central auditory processing tests and hearing in noise tests (HINTs) were evaluated at the beginning of the study and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the use of a monaural HA in the HA group compared to the control group. The changes in the evaluation parameters were statistically analyzed using the linear mixed model.Results: A total of 26 participants (13 in the HA and 13 in the control group) were included in this study. The frequency (<i>p</i><0.01) and duration test (<i>p</i>=0.02) scores showed significant improvements in the HA group after 1 year, while the HINT scores showed no significant change.Conclusions: After using an HA for one year, patients performed better on temporal resolution tests. No improvement was documented with regard to hearing in noise.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the AzBio Speech Recognition in Noise Test

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vermiglio ◽  
Lauren Leclerc ◽  
Meagan Thornton ◽  
Hannah Osborne ◽  
Elizabeth Bonilla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Reference Standard ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Purpose The goal of this study was to determine the ability of the AzBio speech recognition in noise (SRN) test to distinguish between groups of participants with and without a self-reported SRN disorder and a self-reported signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss. Method Fifty-four native English-speaking young adults with normal pure-tone thresholds (≤ 25 dB HL, 0.25–6.0 kHz) participated. Individuals who reported hearing difficulty in a noisy restaurant (Reference Standard 1) were placed in the SRN disorder group. SNR loss groups were created based on the self-report of the ability to hear Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) sentences in steady-state speech-shaped noise, four-talker babble, and 20-talker babble in a controlled listening environment (Reference Standard 2). Participants with HINT thresholds poorer than or equal to the median were assigned to the SNR loss group. Results The area under the curve from the receiver operating characteristics curves revealed that the AzBio test was not a significant predictor of an SRN disorder, or an SNR loss using the steady-state noise Reference Standard 2 condition. However, the AzBio was a significant predictor of an SNR loss using the four-talker babble and 20-talker babble Reference Standard 2 conditions ( p < .05). The AzBio was a significant predictor of an SNR loss when using the average HINT thresholds across the three Reference Standard 2 masker conditions (area under the curve = .79, p = .001). Conclusions The AzBio test was not a significant predictor of a self-reported SRN disorder or a self-reported SNR loss in steady-state noise. However, it was a significant predictor of a self-reported SNR loss in babble noise and the average across all noise conditions. A battery of reference standard tests with a range of maskers in a controlled listening environment is recommended for diagnostic accuracy evaluations of SRN tests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document