Recognition performance on single-speaker recordings of W-22, NU6, and PB-50 by listeners with normal hearing

Authors

  • Richard H. Wilson Auditory Research Laboratory (126), James H. Quillen VA Medical Center, Moun- tain Home, Tennessee, 37684, USA; Departments of Surgery and Communicative Disorders, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, 37614, USA
  • Rachel McArdle Auditory Research Laboratory (126), Bay Pines VA Healthcare System, Bay Pines, Florida, 33744, USA; Department of Communicative Disorders and Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33620, USA

Abstract

The psychometric characteristics of the PB-50, CID W-22, and NU No. 6 monosyllabic word lists were compared with one another, with the CID W-1 spondaic words, and with the nine monosyllabic digits. The 583 words were spoken by the same speaker and were presented at 4 levels (−7-, −2-, 3-, and 8-dB S/N) in speech-spectrum noise xed at 72-dB SPL. Twenty-four young adults with normal hearing participated in four sessions. Recognition performance on the four lists within each of the three monosyllabic word materials were equivalent, ±0.4 dB. Likewise, word-recognition performance on the PB-50, W-22, and NU No. 6 word lists were equivalent, ±0.2 dB. The mean recognition performance at the 50% point with the 36 W-1 spondaic words was ∼6-dB better than mean performance on monosyllabic words. Recognition performance on the monosyllabic digits was 1-2 dB better than mean performance on the monosyllabic words.

References

American National Standards Institute. (1996). “Specification for audiometers (ANSI S3.6-1996),” New York, Author.

Beattie, R. C., Edgerton, B. J., and Svihovec, D. A. (1977). “A comparison of the Auditec of St. Louis cassette recordings of NU-6 and CID W-22 on a normal hearing population,” J. Speech Hear. Dis. 42, 60-64.

Egan, J. (1948). “Articulation testing methods,” The Laryngoscope, 58, 955-991. Finney, D. J. (1952). “Statistical method in biological assay,” London, C. Griffen.

Hirsh, I. J., Davis, H., Silverman, S. R., Reynolds, E. G., Eldert, E., and Benson, R. W. (1952). "Development of materials for speech audiometry," J. Speech Hear. Dis. 17, 321-337.

Heckendorf, A. L., Wiley, T. L., and Wilson, R. H. (1997). "Performance Norms for the VA Compact Disc Versions of CID W-22 (Hirsh) and PB-50 (Rush Hughes) Word Lists," J. Am. Acad. Audio. 8, 163-172.

Kreul, E. J., Bell, D. W., and Nixon, J. C. (1969). “Factors affecting speech discrimination test difficulty,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 12, 281-287.

Lehiste, I., and Peterson, G. E. (1959). “Linguistic considerations in the study of speech intelligibility,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 280-286.

Lovrinic, J., Burgi, E., and Curry, E. (1968). “A comparative evaluation of five speech discrimination measures,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 11, 372-381.

McArdle, R., and Wilson, R. H. (2007). “Interpreting Word-Recognition Data from the PB-50, W-22, and NU No. 6 Lists using the Neighborhood Activation Model and Phonemic Features of the Materials,” J, Am, Acad, Audio (under review).

Miller, G. A., Heise, G. A., and Lichten, W. (1951). “The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials,” J. Exp. Psychol. 41, 329-335.

Peterson, G. E. and Lehiste, I. (1962). “Revised CNC lists for Auditory tests,” J. Speech Hear Dis. 27, 62-70.

Silverman S, and Hirsh, I. (1955). “Problems related to the use of speech in clinical audiometry,” Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngo. 64, 1234-1244.

Tillman, T. W., and Carhart, R. (1966). “An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words,” Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. Brooks Air Force Base, TX USAF School of Aerospace Medicine Technical Report.

Wilson, R. H., Coley, K. E., Haenel, J., and Browning, K. (1976). “Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6: Normative and Comparative Intelligibility Functions,” J. Am. Audio. Soc. 1, 221-228.

Wilson, R. H. and Margolis, R. H. (1983). “Measurement of the auditory thresholds for speech stimuli”. in Principles of speech audiometry. Baltimore: University Park Press, 79-126.

Wilson, R. H., and Oyler, A. (1997). "Psychometric functions for the CID W-22 and NU Auditory Test No. 6 materials spoken by the same speaker," Ear. Hear. 18, 430-433.

Wilson, R. H., Zizz, C. A., Shanks, J. E., and Causey, G. D. (1990). "Normative data in quiet, broadband noise, and competing message for Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 by a female speaker," J. Speech Hear. Dis. 55, 771-778.

Additional Files

Published

2007-12-15

How to Cite

Wilson, R. H., & McArdle, R. (2007). Recognition performance on single-speaker recordings of W-22, NU6, and PB-50 by listeners with normal hearing. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 1, 423–432. Retrieved from http://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2007-41

Issue

Section

2007/4. Speech perception and processing