Perceptual equivalence of test lists in a monosyllabic speech test with different hearing thresholds

Authors

  • Alexandra Winkler Institute of Hearing Technology and Audiology, Jade University of Applied Sciences, Oldenburg, Germany Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4All”
  • Britta Jensen Institute of Hearing Technology and Audiology, Jade University of Applied Sciences, Oldenburg, Germany Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4All”
  • Thomas Brand Medizinische Physik, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4All”
  • Inga Holube Institute of Hearing Technology and Audiology, Jade University of Applied Sciences, Oldenburg, Germany Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4All”

Abstract

EN ISO 8253-3 (2012) describes the requirements and validation of speech material for speech audiometry. Although speech tests are typically applied to listeners with hearing impairment, the validation is conducted with listeners with normal hearing abilities. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of hearing thresholds on the validation results. Since hearing thresholds of listeners with hearing impairment show a large variability, groups of participants with normal hearing listened to the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test (Hahlbrock, 1953) preprocessed with two simulated homogenous hearing losses, as well as to the original speech material. Discrimination functions were fitted to the results and speech levels for speech recognition scores of 50% were determined. According to EN ISO 8253-3 (2012), the perceptual balance of the lists is given when the confidence interval of the speech levels is within 1 dB from the median across all lists. This criterion is not fulfilled for several test lists, which partly differed for the hearing-loss configurations. When taking the measurement accuracy of the experiment into account, consistent deviations are observed in four test lists. The results suggest that if perceptual balance is fulfilled for participants with normal hearing, this might not be valid for participants with hearing impairment. Predictions of speech recognition using the Speech Intelligibility Index could not replicate test list differences.

References

Deutsches Institut für Normung (1995a). “DIN 45626-1; Tonträger mit Sprache für Gehörprüfung, Teil 1: Tonträger mit Wörtern nach DIN 45621-1,” Beuth Verlag, Berlin.

Deutsches Institut für Normung (1995b). “DIN 45621-1; Sprache für Gehörprüfung. Teil 1: Ein- und mehrsilbige Wörter,” Beuth Verlag, Berlin.
American National Standards Institute (1997). “ANSI S3.5-1997; Methods for calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII),” Acoustical Society of America, New York.

Brand T. and Kollmeier B. (2002). “Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 111, 2801-2810.

European Committee for Standardization (2012). “EN ISO 8253-3; Acoustics –Audiometric test methods – Part 3: Speech Audiometry,” Beuth Verlag, Berlin.

Grimm G., Herzke T., Berg D., and Hohmann V. (2006). “The master hearing aid: a pc-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation,” Acta Acust. United Ac., 92, 618-628.

Hahlbrock K.H. (1953). “Über Sprachaudiometrie und neue Wörterteste”, ArchivOhr-usw. Heilk. u. Z.Hals- usw. Heilk., Bd. 162, 394-431.
HörTech gGmbH: http://www.hoertech.de (accessed on 31st of July 2015).

Nüsse T., von Gablenz P., Holube I., and Bonsel H. (2014). “Analyse tonaudio-metrischer Daten von Kunden einer Hörgeräteakustikerkette,” Hörakustik, 10, 8-13.

Pascoe, D.P. (1988). “Clinical measurements of the auditory dynamic range and their relation to formulas for hearing aid gain,” in Proc. 13th Danavox symposium: Hearing Aid Fitting: Theoretical And Practical Views. Ed. J. Jensen. Copenhagen, Denmark.

von Gablenz, P. and Holube, I. (2015). “Hearing threshold distribution and effect of screening in a population-based German sample,” Int. J. Audiol., 1-16, doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1084054

Downloads

Published

2015-12-15

How to Cite

Winkler, A., Jensen, B., Brand, T., & Holube, I. (2015). Perceptual equivalence of test lists in a monosyllabic speech test with different hearing thresholds. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 5, 405–412. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2015-48

Issue

Vol. 5 (2015): Individual Hearing Loss - Characterization, modelling, compensation strategies

Section

2015/6. Speech intelligibility in noise: Evaluation and modelling

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.