Laboratory evaluation of directional preference: Effect of background noise location and stimulus type

Authors

  • Shilpi Banerjee Starkey Laboratories, Inc., Eden Prairie, Minnesota, USA

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the in uence of background noise location and stimulus type as factors contributing to the discrepancy in directional preference between the laboratory and real-world. The task used for this purpose was very similar to that employed with patients – indicating a subjective preference in a paired-comparison format. The main ndings were: (1) directionality is preferred when the signal is located at 0° azimuth, (2) asymmetrical directional setting is not undesirable in an asymmetrical noise eld, and (3) there is no signi cant difference in subjective microphone preference in a simulated real-world environment.

References

Banerjee, S. (2008). “Real-world hearing aid behaviour,” paper presented at the American Auditory Society, Scottsdale, AZ.

Brungart, D., Simpson, B., Ericson, M., and Scott, K. (2001). “Informational and energetic masking in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 2527-2538.

Cord, M., Surr, R., Walden, B., and Dyrlund, O. (2004). “Relationship between laboratory measures of directional advantage and everyday success with directional microphone hearing aids,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 15, 353-364.

Cord, M., Surr, R., Walden, B., and Olson, L. (2002). “Performance of directional microphone hearing aids in everyday life,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 13, 295-307.

Critchlow, D., and Fligner, M. (1991). “Paired comparison, triple comparison and ranking experiments as generalized linear models and their implementation on GLIM,” Psychometrika, 56, 517-533.

Hornsby, B., and Ricketts, T. (2007). “Directional bene t in the presence of speech and speech-like maskers,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 18, 5-16.

Kochkin, S. (2002b). “MarkeTrak VI: 10-year customer satisfaction trends in the US hearing instrument market,” Hear Rev. 9, 14-25,46.

Kochkin, S. (2005). “MarkeTrak VII: Customer satisfaction with hearing aids in the digital age,” Hear J. 58, 30-37.

Leeuw, A., and Dreschler, W. (1991). “Advantages of directional hearing aid microphones related to room acoustics,” Audiology 30, 330-344.

Nilsson, M., Soli, S. D., and Sullivan, J. A. (1994). “Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1085-1099.

Ricketts, T. (2000). “Impact of noise source con guration on directional hearing aid bene t and performance,” Ear Hear. 21, 194-205.

Ricketts, T., and Mueller, H. (2000). “Predicting directional hearing aid bene t for individual listeners,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 11, 561-569.

Saunders, G., and Cienkowski, K. (2002). “A test to measure subjective and objective speech intelligibility,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 13, 38-49.

Wagener, K., Hansen, M., and Ludvigsen, C. (2008). ”Recording and classi cation of the acoustic environment of hearing aid users,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 19, 348-370.

Walden, B., Surr, R., Cord, M., and Dyrlund, O. (2004). “Predicting hearing aid microphone preference in everyday listening,” J. Am. Acad. Aud. 15, 365-394.

Additional Files

Published

2009-12-15

How to Cite

Banerjee, S. (2009). Laboratory evaluation of directional preference: Effect of background noise location and stimulus type. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 2, 513–522. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2009-53

Issue

Vol. 2 (2009): Binaural Processing and Spatial Hearing

Section

2009/4. Recent concepts in binaural cochlear-implant and hearing-aid processing

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.