Audibility and speech intelligibility revisited: implications for amplification

Authors

  • Teresa Y. C. Ching National Acoustic Laboratories, Australian Hearing, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia HEARing CRC, Australia
  • Harvey Dillon National Acoustic Laboratories, Australian Hearing, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia
  • Frances Lockhart National Acoustic Laboratories, Australian Hearing, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia
  • Emma van Wanrooy National Acoustic Laboratories, Australian Hearing, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia
  • Matt Flax National Acoustic Laboratories, Australian Hearing, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia

Abstract

A major goal of amplification is to restore audibility to people with hearing loss in as wide a range of frequencies as possible for maximising speech intelligibility. The usefulness of audibility for speech intelligibility, however, decreases as hearing loss increases. This reduced effectiveness of audibility may be related to the presence of cochlear dead regions or just to reduced frequency and temporal resolution. In this paper, the current literature that relates the presence of dead regions to usefulness of highfrequency audibility is examined. This is followed by a brief description of an empirical study that investigated factors affecting speech intelligibility in quiet and in noise by hearing-impaired listeners. A modification of the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) method that minimised discrepancies between observed and predicted speech intelligibility is presented. Finally, factors that affect speech intelligibility are summarised together with a discussion on implications for amplification.

References

ANSI S3.5-1997. American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index. New York: American National Standards Institute.

ANSI S3.22-2009. Specification of hearing aid characteristics. New York: American National Standards Institute.

Baer, T., Moore, B. C. J., and Kluk, K. (2002). “Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 112, 1133-1144.

Boothroyd, A. and Medwetsky, L. (1992). “Spectral distribution of /s/ and the frequency response of hearing aids” Ear Hear., 13, 150-157.

Ching, T. Y. C., Dillon, H., and Byrne, D. (1998). “Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of highfrequency amplification” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 103, 1128-1140.

Ching, T. Y. C., Dillon, H., Katsch, R., et al. (2001). “Maximising effective audibility in hearing aid fitting” Ear Hear., 22, 212-224.

Ching, T. Y. C., Dillon, H., and Katsch, R. (2002). “Do children require more highfrequency audibility than adults with similar hearing losses?” In: Seewald, R.C. and Gravel, J.S. (Eds.) A Sound Foundation through Early Amplification 2001: Proceedings of the second international conference. Stäfa, Switzerland: Phonak AG, 141-152.

Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Johnson, J., and Riviera, I. (2011). “Cochlear dead regions in typical hearing aid candidates: prevalence and implications for use of high-frequency speech cues” Ear Hear., 32, 339-348.

Hogan, C. A., and Turner, C. W. (1998). “High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 104, 432-441.

Hornsby, B. W. Y., Johnson, E., and Picou, E. (2011). “Effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to bilateral speech understanding” Ear Hear., pre-print.

Hornsby, B. W. Y. and Ricketts, T. A. (2003). “The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 113, 1706-1717.

Knutson, J. F., Schartz, H. A., Gantz, B. J., Tyler, R. S., Hinriches, J. V., and Woodworth, G. W. (1991). “Psychological change following 18 months of cochlear implant use” Annals Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol., 100, 877-882.

Mackersie, C. L., Crocker, T. L., and Davis, R. A. (2004). “Limiting high-frequency hearing aid gain in listeners with and without suspected cochlear dead regions” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 15, 498-507.

Moeller, M. P., Hoover, B., Putman, C., Arbataitis, K., Bohnenkamp, G., Peterson, B., Wood, S., Lewis, D., Pittman, A., and Stelmachowicz, P. (2007). “Vocalizations of infants with hearing loss compared with infants with normal hearing: Part I – phonetic development” Ear Hear., 28, 605-627.

Moore, B. C. J., Huss, M., Vickers, D. A., Glasberg, B. R., and Alcantara, J. I. (2000). “A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea” Br. J. Audiol., 34, 205-224.

Moore, B. C. J. (2001). “Dead regions in the cochlea: diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing aids” Trends Amplif., 5, 1-34.

Moore, B. C. J., Glasberg, B. R., and Stone, M. (2004). “New version of the TEN test with calibrations in dB HL” Ear Hear., 25, 468-487.

Murray, N. M. and Byrne, D. (1986). “Performance of hearing-impaired and normal hearing listeners with various high frequency cut-off in hearing aids” Aus. J. Audiol., 8, 21-28.

Parkinson, A. J., Newall, P., Byrne, D., and Plant, G. (1996). “Relationship of aided speech recognition to hearing thresholds and aided speech-peak sensation levels in severely and profoundly hearing impaired adults” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 7, 305-321.

Pavlovic, C. V., Studebaker, G. A., and Sherbecoe, R. L. (1986). “An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 80, 50-57.

Preminger, J. E., Carpenter, R., and Ziegler, C. H. (2005). “A clinical perspective on cochlear dead regions: intelligibility of speech and subjective hearing aid benefit” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 16, 600-613.

Rankovic, C. M. (1991). “An application of the articulation index to hearing aid fitting” J. Speech Hear. Res., 34, 391-402.

Studebaker, G. A., Sherbecoe, R. L., McDaniel, D. M., and Gray, G.A. (1997). “Age-related changes in monosyllabic word recognition performance when audibility is held constant” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 8, 150-162.

Turner, C. W. and Cummings, K. J. (1999). “Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss” Am. J. Audiol. 8, 47-56.

Turner, C. W. and Henry, B. A. (2002). “Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 1675-1680.

Vickers, D. A., Moore, B. C. J., and Baer, T. (2001). “Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without cochlear dead regions at high frequencies” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 110, 1164-1175.

Downloads

Published

2011-12-15

How to Cite

Ching, T. Y. C., Dillon, H., Lockhart, F., van Wanrooy, E., & Flax, M. (2011). Audibility and speech intelligibility revisited: implications for amplification. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 3, 11–19. Retrieved from http://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2011-02

Issue

Section

2011/1. Indicators of hearing impairment and measures of speech perception