Adaptation to hearing-aid microphone modes in a dynamic localisation task

  • William M Whitmer Hearing Sciences – Scottish Section, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK
  • Nadja Schinkel-Bielefeld Sivantos GmbH, Erlangen, DE
  • David McShefferty Hearing Sciences – Scottish Section, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK
  • Cecil Wilson Sivantos GmbH, Erlangen, DE
  • Graham Naylor Hearing Sciences – Scottish Section, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK
Keywords: head orientation, hearing aid directionality, behavioural adaptation

Abstract

New technology can foster new ways of listening. A new hearing-aid programme can alter how we hear not only sources of sound but also their locations. While previous research has established how different hearing aid types and microphone modes affect static localisation ability, the current study explored the effects of introducing unfamiliar devices and microphone modes on dynamic localisation ability. Twelve experienced users of bilateral behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids oriented themselves to a target sound. Each trial consisted of 5-s segments of a target talker in a continuous background of far-field babble at the same overall level as the target. Targets were presented at either ±30, ±75 or ±120°. Head-orientation trajectories were measured with infra-red cameras. Participants first wore their own hearing aids for one block of 60 trials, then wore a new hearing aid and completed five more blocks in three different directional-microphone modes. In general, results showed trajectory differences between modes, and a modest influence of the preceding mode (i.e., adaptation). Three additional participants experienced with in-the-ear hearing aids oriented poorly with the new BTE device for the first two blocks, then returned to their baseline performance. This suggests that such a form-factor change requires additional time for spatial adaptation.

References

Akeroyd, M.A., and Whitmer, W.M. (2016). “Spatial hearing and hearing aids,” in Hearing Aids. Edited by G.R. Polpeka, B.C.J. Moore, R.R. Fay & A.N. Popper. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-33036-5_7

Brimijoin, W.O., Whitmer W.M., McShefferty, D., and Akeroyd, M.A. (2014). “The effect of hearing aid microphone mode on performance in an auditory orienting task.” Ear. Hear., 35(5), e204-e212. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000053

MacPherson, A., and Akeroyd, M.A. (2013). “The Glasgow Monitoring of Uninterrupted Speech Task (GMUST): A naturalistic measure of speech intelligibility in noise.” Proc. Meet. Acous., 19, 050068. doi: 10.1121/1.4805817

Maurer, L.K., Maurer, H., and Müller, H. (2017). Analysis of timing variability in human movements by aligning parameter curves in time. Behav. Res. Methods., 50(5), 1841-1852. doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0952-0

Neher, T., Wagener, K.C., and Latzel, M. (2017). “Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.” Hear. Res., 353, 36-48. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2017.07.014

Picou, E., and Ricketts, T. (2019). “An Evaluation of Hearing Aid Beamforming Microphone Arrays in a Noisy Laboratory Setting.” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 30(2), 131-144. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17090

Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., and Simoncelli, E.P. (2004). “Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity.” IEEE Trans. Image Proc., 13(4), 600-612. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2003.81986

Published
2020-03-26
How to Cite
Whitmer, W., Schinkel-Bielefeld, N., McShefferty, D., Wilson, C., & Naylor, G. (2020). Adaptation to hearing-aid microphone modes in a dynamic localisation task. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 7, 197-204. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2019-24
Section
2019/4. Novel directions in hearing-instrument technology