Perceptual audio evaluation by hearing-impaired listeners – some considerations on task training

Authors

  • Renskje K. Hietkamp Oticon A/S, Research Centre Eriksholm, Kongevejen 243, DK-3070 Snekkersten, Denmark
  • Martin R. Andersen Oticon A/S, Research Centre Eriksholm, Kongevejen 243, DK-3070 Snekkersten, Denmark
  • Thomas Lunner Oticon A/S, Research Centre Eriksholm, Kongevejen 243, DK-3070 Snekkersten, Denmark

Abstract

Use of perceptual audio evaluation is widespread in the audio and telecommunication areas and is also relevant to hearing-aid research, as it addresses artifacts of signal processing in hearing aids. However, in hearing-aid research, listeners are typically hearing impaired and this poses a challenge for the training material; the impaired hearing system differs markedly from the normal hearing system and shows large, individual, and highly unpredictable variation. This was demonstrated in a pilot study in the form of a listening experiment with music and speech stimuli, processed to generate different degrees of non-linear artifacts. Six subjects with mild- to-moderate, sloping hearing losses were tested after some initial training. Results were contradictory, but seemed to indicate that the subjects were not able to detect differences in sound quality. A stepwise training procedure was therefore developed for perceptual audio evaluation targeting hearing impaired listeners, which was inspired by Bech and Zacharov [Perceptual Audio Evaluation - Theory, Method and Application (2006)]. Key issues in the training procedure are priming to the artifacts under study and a test- ow that facilitates errorless learning. Using this training procedure in an experiment with the same type of stimuli as before, the results showed that differences in sound quality were detected in the 2-5 kHz region. These results hint at a need for careful designed training when hearing impaired listeners are to be used for perceptual audio evaluation.

References

ANSI S3.5 (1997). “Methods for calculation of the speech intelligibility index,” American National Standard.

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory (Oxford University Press, Oxford). Baddeley, A. D., and Wilson, B. A. (1994). “When implicit learning fails: Amnesia and the problem of error elimination,” Neuropsychologia 32, 53-68.

Bech, S., and Zacharov, N. (2006). Perceptual Audio Evaluation - Theory, Method and Application (Wiley, West Sussex).

Clark, D. (1982). “High-Resolution Subjective Testing Using a Double-Blind Comparator,” J. Audio Eng. Soc. 30, 330-338.

Fillingham, J. K., Hodgson, C., Sage, K., and Lambon-Ralph, M. A. (2003). “The application of errorless learning to aphasic disorders: A review of theory and practice,” Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 13, 337-363.

Hansen, V. (1987). “Establishing a panel of listeners at Bang and Olufsen: a report”, In Perception of reproduced sound, edited by S. Bech and O. J. Pedersen, (Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen).

ITU-R (1990). “Recommendation BS.1116-1, Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems including multichannel sound systems,” International Telecommunications Union Radiocommunication Assembly.

Miller, W. R., and Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational interviewing; preparing people for change (The Guilford Press, New York).

Wagener, K., Josvassen J. L., and Ardenkjær, R. (2003). “Design, optimization and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise”, Int. J. Audiol. 42, 10-17.

Additional Files

Published

2009-12-15

How to Cite

Hietkamp, R. K., Andersen, M. R., & Lunner, T. (2009). Perceptual audio evaluation by hearing-impaired listeners – some considerations on task training. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 2, 487–496. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2009-50

Issue

Section

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