scholarly journals Evaluation of Different Signal Processing Options in Unilateral and Bilateral Cochlear Freedom Implant Recipients Using R-SpaceTM Background Noise

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (02) ◽  
pp. 065-080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison M. Brockmeyer ◽  
Lisa G. Potts
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Processing Condition ◽  
Test System ◽  
Adaptive Beamforming ◽  
Processing Conditions ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: Difficulty understanding in background noise is a common complaint of cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Programming options are available to improve speech recognition in noise for CI users including automatic dynamic range optimization (ADRO), autosensitivity control (ASC), and a two-stage adaptive beamforming algorithm (BEAM). However, the processing option that results in the best speech recognition in noise is unknown. In addition, laboratory measures of these processing options often show greater degrees of improvement than reported by participants in everyday listening situations. To address this issue, Compton-Conley and colleagues developed a test system to replicate a restaurant environment. The R-SPACE™ consists of eight loudspeakers positioned in a 360 degree arc and utilizes a recording made at a restaurant of background noise. Purpose: The present study measured speech recognition in the R-SPACE with four processing options: standard dual-port directional (STD), ADRO, ASC, and BEAM. Research Design: A repeated-measures, within-subject design was used to evaluate the four different processing options at two noise levels. Study Sample: Twenty-seven unilateral and three bilateral adult Nucleus Freedom CI recipients. Intervention: The participants’ everyday program (with no additional processing) was used as the STD program. ADRO, ASC, and BEAM were added individually to the STD program to create a total of four programs. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants repeated Hearing in Noise Test sentences presented at 0 degrees azimuth with R-SPACE restaurant noise at two noise levels, 60 and 70 dB SPL. The reception threshold for sentences (RTS) was obtained for each processing condition and noise level. Results: In 60 dB SPL noise, BEAM processing resulted in the best RTS, with a significant improvement over STD and ADRO processing. In 70 dB SPL noise, ASC and BEAM processing had significantly better mean RTSs compared to STD and ADRO processing. Comparison of noise levels showed that STD and BEAM processing resulted in significantly poorer RTSs in 70 dB SPL noise compared to the performance with these processing conditions in 60 dB SPL noise. Bilateral participants demonstrated a bilateral improvement compared to the better monaural condition for both noise levels and all processing conditions, except ASC in 60 dB SPL noise. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the use of processing options that utilize noise reduction, like those available in ASC and BEAM, improve a CI recipient's ability to understand speech in noise in listening situations similar to those experienced in the real world. The choice of the best processing option is dependent on the noise level, with BEAM best at moderate noise levels and ASC best at loud noise levels for unilateral CI recipients. Therefore, multiple noise programs or a combination of processing options may be necessary to provide CI users with the best performance in a variety of listening situations.

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 Speech Recognition in Noise in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Recipients Using Digital Remote Wireless Microphone Technology

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (07) ◽  
pp. 607-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Wesarg ◽  
Susan Arndt ◽  
Konstantin Wiebe ◽  
Frauke Schmid ◽  
Annika Huber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Percent Correct ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Wireless Microphone ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

AbstractPrevious research in cochlear implant (CI) recipients with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss showed improvements in speech recognition in noise using remote wireless microphone systems. However, to our knowledge, no previous studies have addressed the benefit of these systems in CI recipients with single-sided deafness.The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential improvement in speech recognition in noise for distant speakers in single-sided deaf (SSD) CI recipients obtained using the digital remote wireless microphone system, Roger. In addition, we evaluated the potential benefit in normal hearing (NH) participants gained by applying this system.Speech recognition in noise for a distant speaker in different conditions with and without Roger was evaluated with a two-way repeated-measures design in each group, SSD CI recipients, and NH participants. Post hoc analyses were conducted using pairwise comparison t-tests with Bonferroni correction.Eleven adult SSD participants aided with CIs and eleven adult NH participants were included in this study.All participants were assessed in 15 test conditions (5 listening conditions × 3 noise levels) each. The listening conditions for SSD CI recipients included the following: (I) only NH ear and CI turned off, (II) NH ear and CI (turned on), (III) NH ear and CI with Roger 14, (IV) NH ear with Roger Focus and CI, and (V) NH ear with Roger Focus and CI with Roger 14. For the NH participants, five corresponding listening conditions were chosen: (I) only better ear and weaker ear masked, (II) both ears, (III) better ear and weaker ear with Roger Focus, (IV) better ear with Roger Focus and weaker ear, and (V) both ears with Roger Focus. The speech level was fixed at 65 dB(A) at 1 meter from the speech-presenting loudspeaker, yielding a speech level of 56.5 dB(A) at the recipient's head. Noise levels were 55, 65, and 75 dB(A). Digitally altered noise recorded in school classrooms was used as competing noise. Speech recognition was measured in percent correct using the Oldenburg sentence test.In SSD CI recipients, a significant improvement in speech recognition was found for all listening conditions with Roger (III, IV, and V) versus all no-Roger conditions (I and II) at the higher noise levels (65 and 75 dB[A]). NH participants significantly benefited from the application of Roger in noise for higher levels, too. In both groups, no significant difference was detected between any of the different listening conditions at 55 dB(A) competing noise. There was also no significant difference between any of the Roger conditions III, IV, and V across all noise levels.The application of the advanced remote wireless microphone system, Roger, in SSD CI recipients provided significant benefits in speech recognition for distant speakers at higher noise levels. In NH participants, the application of Roger also produced a significant benefit in speech recognition in noise.

Evaluation of Speech Recognition of Cochlear Implant Recipients Using a Personal Digital Adaptive Radio Frequency System

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (08) ◽  
pp. 714-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jace Wolfe ◽  
Mila Morais ◽  
Erin Schafer ◽  
Emily Mills ◽  
Hans E. Mülder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Radio Frequency ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Digital System ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Transmission Systems ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: Previous research supports the use of frequency modulation (FM) systems for improving speech recognition in noise of individuals with cochlear implants (CIs). However, at this time, there is no published research on the potential speech recognition benefit of new digital adaptive wireless radio transmission systems. Purpose: The goal of this study was to compare speech recognition in quiet and in noise of CI recipients while using traditional, fixed-gain analog FM systems, adaptive analog FM systems, and adaptive digital wireless radio frequency transmission systems. Research Design: A three-way repeated-measures design was used to examine performance differences among devices, among speech recognition conditions in quiet and in increasing levels of background noise, and between users of Advanced Bionics and Cochlear CIs. Study Sample: Seventeen users of Advanced Bionics Harmony CI sound processors and 20 users of Cochlear Nucleus 5 sound processors were included in the study. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants were tested in a total of 32 speech-recognition-in noise-test conditions, which included one no-FM and three device conditions (fixed-gain FM, adaptive FM, and adaptive digital) at the following signal levels: 64 dBA speech (at the location of the participant) in quiet and 64 dBA speech with competing noise at 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, and 80 dBA noise levels. Results: No significant differences were detected between the users of Advanced Bionics and Cochlear CIs. All of the radio frequency system conditions (i.e., fixed-gain FM, adaptive FM, and adaptive digital) outperformed the no-FM conditions in test situations with competing noise. Specifically, in conditions with 70, 75, and 80 dBA of competing noise, the adaptive digital system provided better performance than the fixed-gain and adaptive FM systems. The adaptive FM system did provide better performance than the fixed-gain FM system at 70 and 75 dBA of competing noise. At the lower noise levels of 50, 55, 60, and 65 dBA, no significant differences were detected across the three systems, and no significant differences were found across the quiet conditions. In all conditions, performance became poorer as the competing noise level increased. Conclusions: In high levels of noise, the adaptive digital system provides superior performance when compared to adaptive analog FM and fixed-gain FM systems.

scholarly journals Effects of Auditory Training and Remote Microphone Technology on the Behavioral Performance of Children and Young Adults Who Have Autism Spectrum Disorder

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (05) ◽  
pp. 431-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin C. Schafer ◽  
Kamakshi V. Gopal ◽  
Lauren Mathews ◽  
Skyler Thompson ◽  
Kara Kaiser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Children And Young Adults ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

AbstractIndividuals who have a normal pure-tone audiogram but are diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often exhibit poorer speech recognition and auditory processing when compared with neurotypical peers with normal pure-tone audiograms.The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of a 12-week auditory processing training (APT) program that was designed to address the deleterious effects of background noise and auditory processing deficits that are common among individuals diagnosed with ASD.A repeated measures design was used.The sample consisted of 15 high-functioning children and young adults who had a formal diagnosis of ASD and who were recruited from local clinics and school districts.Participants completed the 12-week APT program consisting of computerized dichotic training, one-on-one therapist-directed auditory training, and the use of remote microphone (RM) technology at home and in the classroom.Participants completed a comprehensive test battery to assess general auditory processing skills, speech recognition in noise, acceptance of background noise, spatial processing, binaural integration abilities, self-perceived difficulties, and observed behaviors. Testing was conducted before (n = 15), immediately after (n = 15), and 12 weeks after (n = 7) the completion of the APT program. Paired t-tests, repeated measures analysis of variance, or nonparametric tests were used to analyze the data.On average, the APT program significantly enhanced general auditory processing abilities, including binaural integration and subjective listening abilities in the classroom. When the RM was used, significantly improved speech recognition and improved acceptance of background noise was measured relative to a condition with no technology.Following the APT program, the participants exhibited the greatest improvements in testing that required binaural integration and auditory working memory. The use of the RM technology was able to address the deleterious effects of noise on speech recognition in noise and acceptance of noise levels.

Improving Hearing Performance for Cochlear Implant Recipients with Use of a Digital, Wireless, Remote-Microphone, Audio-Streaming Accessory

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (06) ◽  
pp. 532-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jace Wolfe ◽  
Mila Morais ◽  
Erin Schafer
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Audio Signals ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Accessory Device ◽  
Sound Processor

Background: Cochlear implant (CI) recipients experience difficulty understanding speech in noise. Remote-microphone technology that improves the signal-to-noise ratio is recognized as an effective means to improve speech recognition in noise; however, there are no published studies evaluating the potential benefits of a wireless, remote-microphone, digital, audio-streaming accessory device (heretofore referred to as a remote-microphone accessory) designed to deliver audio signals directly to a CI sound processor. Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare speech recognition in quiet and in noise of recipients while using their CI alone and with a remote-microphone accessory. Research Design: A two-way repeated measures design was used to evaluate performance differences obtained in quiet and in increasing levels of competing noise with the CI sound processor alone and with the sound processor paired to the remote microphone accessory. Study Sample: Sixteen users of Cochlear Nucleus 24 Freedom, CI512, and CI422 implants were included in the study. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants were evaluated in 14 conditions including use of the sound processor alone and with the remote-microphone accessory in quiet and at the following signal levels: 65 dBA speech (at the location of the participant; 85 dBA at the location of the remote microphone) in quiet and competing noise at 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, and 75 dBA noise levels. Speech recognition was evaluated in each of these conditions with one full list of AzBio sentences. Results: Speech recognition in quiet and in all competing noise levels, except the 75 dBA condition, was significantly better with use of the remote-microphone accessory compared with participants’ performance with the CI sound processor alone. As expected, in all technology conditions, performance was significantly poorer as the competing noise level increased. Conclusions: Use of a remote-microphone accessory designed for a CI sound processor provides superior speech recognition in quiet and in noise when compared with performance obtained with the CI sound processor alone.

scholarly journals Effects of Varying Noise Levels and Lighting Levels on Multimodal Speech and Visual Gesture Interaction with Aerobots

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 2066
Author(s):  
Ayodeji Opeyemi Abioye ◽  
Stephen D. Prior ◽  
Peter Saddington ◽  
Sarvapali D. Ramchurn
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Gesture Recognition ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Computer Hardware ◽  
Image Processing Technique ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Design And Technology ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Gesture Control ◽  
The Individual

This paper investigated the effects of varying noise levels and varying lighting levels on speech and gesture control command interfaces for aerobots. The aim was to determine the practical suitability of the multimodal combination of speech and visual gesture in human aerobotic interaction, by investigating the limits and feasibility of use of the individual components. In order to determine this, a custom multimodal speech and visual gesture interface was developed using CMU (Carnegie Mellon University) sphinx and OpenCV (Open source Computer Vision) libraries, respectively. An experiment study was designed to measure the individual effects of each of the two main components of speech and gesture, and 37 participants were recruited to participate in the experiment. The ambient noise level was varied from 55 dB to 85 dB. The ambient lighting level was varied from 10 Lux to 1400 Lux, under different lighting colour temperature mixtures of yellow (3500 K) and white (5500 K), and different background for capturing the finger gestures. The results of the experiment, which consisted of around 3108 speech utterance and 999 gesture quality observations, were presented and discussed. It was observed that speech recognition accuracy/success rate falls as noise levels rise, with 75 dB noise level being the aerobot’s practical application limit, as the speech control interaction becomes very unreliable due to poor recognition beyond this. It was concluded that multi-word speech commands were considered more reliable and effective than single-word speech commands. In addition, some speech command words (e.g., land) were more noise resistant than others (e.g., hover) at higher noise levels, due to their articulation. From the results of the gesture-lighting experiment, the effects of both lighting conditions and the environment background on the quality of gesture recognition, was almost insignificant, less than 0.5%. The implication of this is that other factors such as the gesture capture system design and technology (camera and computer hardware), type of gesture being captured (upper body, whole body, hand, fingers, or facial gestures), and the image processing technique (gesture classification algorithms), are more important in developing a successful gesture recognition system. Some further works were suggested based on the conclusions drawn from this findings which included using alternative ASR (Automatic Speech Recognition) speech models and developing more robust gesture recognition algorithm.

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.

An Electrophysiological Measure of Binaural Hearing in Noise

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (06) ◽  
pp. 481-495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Weihing ◽  
Frank E. Musiek
Keyword(s):  
Noise Level ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Different Levels

Background: A common complaint of patients with (central) auditory processing disorder is difficulty understanding speech in noise. Because binaural hearing improves speech understanding in compromised listening situations, quantifying this ability in different levels of noise may yield a measure with high clinical utility. Purpose: To examine binaural enhancement (BE) and binaural interaction (BI) in different levels of noise for the auditory brainstem response (ABR) and middle latency response (MLR) in a normal hearing population. Research Design: An experimental study in which subjects were exposed to a repeated measures design. Study Sample: Fifteen normal hearing female adults served as subjects. Normal hearing was assessed by pure-tone audiometry and otoacoustic emissions. Intervention: All subjects were exposed to 0, 20, and 35 dB effective masking (EM) of white noise during monotic and diotic click stimulation. Data Collection and Analysis: ABR and MLR responses were simultaneously acquired. Peak amplitudes and latencies were recorded and compared across conditions using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: For BE, ABR results showed enhancement at 0 and 20 dB EM, but not at 35 dB EM. The MLR showed BE at all noise levels, but the degree of BE decreased with increasing noise level. For BI, both the ABR and MLR showed BI at all noise levels. However, the degree of BI again decreased with increasing noise level for the MLR. Conclusions: The results demonstrate the ability to measure BE simultaneously in the ABR and MLR in up to 20 dB of EM noise and BI in up to 35 dB EM of noise. Results also suggest that ABR neural generators may respond to noise differently than MLR generators.

Further Validation of the Speech Transmission Index (STI)

1987 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Stephen Boney ◽  
Faith Loven
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Transmission Index ◽  
Speech Transmission ◽  
Binaural Listening ◽  
Prospective Analyses

The present article further evaluates the accuracy of speech-recognition predictions made according to two forms of the Speech Transmission Index (STI) for normal-hearing listeners. The first portion of this article describes the application of the modified Speech Transmission Index (mSTI) to an extensive set of speech-recognition data. Performance of normal-hearing listeners on a nonsense-syllable recognition task in 216 conditions involving different speech levels, background noise levels, reverberation times and filter passbands was found to be monotonically related to the mSTI. The second portion of this article describes a retrospective and prospective analysis of an extended sound-field version of the STI, referred to here as STI x . This extended STI considers many of the variables relevant to sound-field speech recognition, some of which are not incorporated in the mSTI. These variables include: (a) reverberation time; (b) speech level; (e) noise level; (d) talker-to-listener distance; (e) directivity of the speech source; and (f) directivity of the listener (eg., monaural vs. binaural listening). For both the retrospective and prospective analyses, speech-recognition was found to vary monotonically with STI x .

Most Comfortable Listening Levels, Background Noise Levels, and Acceptable Noise Levels for Children and Adults with Normal Hearing

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (05) ◽  
pp. 286-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Moore ◽  
Susan Gordon-Hickey ◽  
Alisha Jones
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Developmental Change ◽  
Pediatric Population ◽  
Strong Predictor ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Levels ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Difference

Background: For adults the acceptable noise level (ANL) has been shown to be a strong predictor of hearing aid success. ANL is calculated as the difference between most comfortable listening level (MCL) and background noise level (BNL). No studies have made direct comparisons of these measures between adults and children. Purpose: To evaluate and compare MCLs, BNLs, and ANLs in children and young adults. Research Design: A cross-sectional design was used in this study. Two groups (children and adults) were tested for each dependent variable. MCLs and BNLs were measured for each participant, and ANLs were computed from these two measurements. Study Sample: The participants were 34 children (8–10 yr) and 34 young adults (19–29 yr) with normal hearing. Results: Significant main effects were found for MCLs and BNLs. There was no main effect for ANLs. MCLs and BNLs were significantly lower for the children than for the adults. Conclusions: These results suggest that while ANLs are unchanged from childhood to adulthood, there appears to be a developmental change in MCLs and BNLs. These findings have implications for the use of ANLs in the pediatric population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document