Systematic groupings in hearing-impaired consonant perception

Authors

  • Andrea C. Trevino Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA
  • Jont B. Allen Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA

Abstract

Auditory training programs are currently being explored as a method of improving hearing-impaired (HI) speech perception; precise knowledge of a patient’s individual differences in speech perception allows one to more accurately diagnose how a training program should be implemented. Re- mapping or variations in the weighting of acoustic cues, due to auditory plasticity, can be examined with the detailed confusion analyses that we have developed at UIUC. We show an analysis of the responses of 17 ears with sensorineural hearing loss to consonant-vowel stimuli, composed of 14 English consonants followed by the vowel /A/, presented in quiet and speech- shaped noise. Although the tested tokens are noise-robust and unambiguous for normal-hearing listeners, the subtle natural variations in signal properties can lead to systematic differences for HI listeners. Specifically, our recent findings have shown token-dependent individual variability in error and confusion groups for HI listeners. A clustering analysis of the confusion data shows that HI listeners fall into specific groups. Many of the token-dependent confusions that define these groups can also be observed for normal-hearing listeners, under higher noise levels or filtering conditions. These HI-listener groups correspond to different acoustic-cue weighting schemes, highlighting where auditory training should be most effective.

References

Boothroyd, A., and Nittrouer, S. (1988). “Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 84, 101-114.

Bronkhorst, A.W., Bosman, A.J., and Smoorenburg, G.F. (1993). “A model for context effects in speech recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 93, 499-509.

Hamerly, G., and Elkan, C. (2004). “Learning the k in k-means,” Adv. Neur. In., 16, 281-288.

Han, W. (2011). Methods for robust characterization of consonant perception in hearing-impaired listeners. PhD thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign.

Miller, G.A., and Nicely, P.E. (1955). “An analysis of perceptual confusions among some english consonants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 27, 338-352.

Phatak, S.A., and Allen, J.B. (2007). “Consonant and vowel confusions in speech- weighted noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 121, 2312-2326.

Singh, R., and Allen, J.B. (2012). “The influence of stop consonants’ perceptual features on the articulation index model,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 131, 3051-3068.

Sweetow, R., and Palmer, C.V. (2005). “Efficacy of individual auditory training in adults: a systematic review of the evidence,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 16, 494-504.

Trevino, A., and Allen, J.B. (2013a). “Individual variability of hearing-impaired consonant perception,” in Seminars in Hearing, Vol. 34 (Thieme Medical Publishers) pp. 74-85.

Trevino, A., and Allen, J.B. (2013b). “Within-consonant perceptual differences in the hearing impaired ear,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 134, 607-617.

Walden, B.E., Erdman, S.A., Montgomery, A.A., Schwartz, D.M., and Prosek, R.A. (1981). “Some effects of training on speech recognition by hearing-impaired adults,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res., 24, 207-216.

Additional Files

Published

2013-12-15

How to Cite

Trevino, A. C., & Allen, J. B. (2013). Systematic groupings in hearing-impaired consonant perception. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 4, 381–388. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2013-43

Issue

Vol. 4 (2013): Auditory Plasticity - Listening with the Brain

Section

2013/7. Hearing loss assessment and characterization

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.