A comparison between the Dutch and American-English digits-in-noise (DIN) tests in normal-hearing listeners

Abstract Objective: The Dutch digits-in-noise test (NL DIN) and the American-English version (US DIN) are speech-in-noise tests for diagnostic and clinical usage. The present study investigated differences between NL DIN and US DIN speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for a group of native Dutch-speaking listeners. Design: In experiment 1, a repeated-measures design was used to compare SRTs for the NL DIN and US DIN in steady-state noise and interrupted noise for monaural, diotic, and dichotic listening conditions. In experiment 2, a subset of these conditions with additional speech material (i.e. US DIN triplets without inter-digit coarticulation/prosody) was used. Study sample: Experiment 1 was conducted with 16 normal-hearing Dutch students. Experiment 2 was conducted with nine different students. Results: No significant differences between SRTs measured with the NL DIN and US DIN were found in steady-state noise. In interrupted noise the US DIN SRTs were significantly better in monaural and diotic listening conditions. Experiment 2 demonstrated that these better SRTs cannot be explained by the combined effect of inter-digit coarticulation and prosody in the American-English triplets. Conclusions: The NL DIN and US DIN are highly comparable and valuable tests for measuring auditory speech recognition abilities. These tests promote across-language comparisons of results.

[1]  Robert S Schlauch,et al.  The effects of fundamental frequency contour manipulations on speech intelligibility in background noise. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  R. Kolinsky,et al.  Statistical information and coarticulation as cues to word boundaries: A matter of signal quality , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  J Bamford,et al.  The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. , 1979, British journal of audiology.

[4]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat: doing phonetics by computer , 2003 .

[5]  Kate Bunton,et al.  Perceptual effects of a flattened fundamental frequency at the sentence level under different listening conditions. , 2003, Journal of communication disorders.

[6]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Results From the Dutch Speech-in-Noise Screening Test by Telephone , 2005, Ear and hearing.

[7]  Richard H. Wilson,et al.  Use of 35 words for evaluation of hearing loss in signal-to-babble ratio: A clinic protocol. , 2005, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[8]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  Measurements and calculations on the simple up-down adaptive procedure for speech-in-noise tests. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  S. Soli,et al.  Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  L L Elliott,et al.  Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Charles S Watson,et al.  Validation of a screening test of auditory function using the telephone. , 2014, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[12]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics , 1996, Speech Commun..

[13]  Aleksander Sek,et al.  Development and evaluation of Polish digit triplet test for auditory screening , 2009, Speech Commun..

[14]  L. Humes,et al.  Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  J. Festen,et al.  The digits-in-noise test: assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[17]  Cas Smits,et al.  The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: steady-state noise. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  John F Culling,et al.  The role of fundamental frequency contours in the perception of speech against interfering speech. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[20]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: The German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype , 2012, International journal of audiology.

[21]  Cas Smits,et al.  The influence of lexical-access ability and vocabulary knowledge on measures of speech recognition in noise , 2016, International journal of audiology.

[22]  M. Killion,et al.  Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Aleksander Sek,et al.  Polish sentence tests for measuring the intelligibility of speech in interfering noise , 2009, International journal of audiology.

[24]  Cas Smits,et al.  The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  Richard H. Wilson,et al.  Development of a speech-in-multitalker-babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance. , 2003, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[26]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[27]  Heleen Luts,et al.  The French digit triplet test: A hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[28]  Charles S Watson,et al.  Telephone screening tests for functionally impaired hearing: current use in seven countries and development of a US version. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.