Effects of moderate cochlear hearing loss on the ability to benefit from temporal fine structure information in speech.

Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured with a competing talker background for signals processed to contain variable amounts of temporal fine structure (TFS) information, using nine normal-hearing and nine hearing-impaired subjects. Signals (speech and background talker) were bandpass filtered into channels. Channel signals for channel numbers above a "cut-off channel" (CO) were vocoded to remove TFS information, while channel signals for channel numbers of CO and below were left unprocessed. Signals from all channels were combined. As a group, hearing-impaired subjects benefited less than normal-hearing subjects from the additional TFS information that was available as CO increased. The amount of benefit varied between hearing-impaired individuals, with some showing no improvement in SRT and one showing an improvement similar to that for normal-hearing subjects. The reduced ability to take advantage of TFS information in speech may partially explain why subjects with cochlear hearing loss get less benefit from listening in a fluctuating background than normal-hearing subjects. TFS information may be important in identifying the temporal "dips" in such a background.

[1]  S. Shamma Speech processing in the auditory system. II: Lateral inhibition and the central processing of speech evoked activity in the auditory nerve. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  B C Moore,et al.  Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  D Byrne,et al.  Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Brian R Glasberg,et al.  Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data , 1990, Hearing Research.

[6]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Christian Lorenzi,et al.  Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: Effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[8]  M. Sachs,et al.  Representation of steady-state vowels in the temporal aspects of the discharge patterns of populations of auditory-nerve fibers. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  S. Rosen Temporal information in speech: acoustic, auditory and linguistic aspects. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[10]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  R. Shannon,et al.  Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Frédéric Berthommier,et al.  Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise , 2006, Hearing Research.

[13]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  B. Moore,et al.  Effect of the speed of a single-channel dynamic range compressor on intelligibility in a competing speech task. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Prediction of absolute thresholds and equal-loudness contours using a modified loudness model. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Jayne B Ahlstrom,et al.  Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  A. Macleod,et al.  A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[18]  I. Pollack,et al.  Effects of Differentiation, Integration, and Infinite Peak Clipping upon the Intelligibility of Speech , 1948 .

[19]  Mary T Cord,et al.  Intelligibility of speech in noise at high presentation levels: effects of hearing loss and frequency region. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Laurent Demany,et al.  Consequences of cochlear damage for the detection of interaural phase differences. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Mischa Schwartz,et al.  Information transmission, modulation, and noise , 1959 .

[22]  B. Moore An introduction to the psychology of hearing, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[23]  Harvey b. Fletcher,et al.  Speech and hearing in communication , 1953 .

[24]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  M F Dorman,et al.  The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Thomas Baer,et al.  Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing‐impaired and normally hearing people , 1997 .

[27]  Zachary M. Smith,et al.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception , 2002, Nature.

[28]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Speech perception problems of the hearing impaired reflect inability to use temporal fine structure , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  B C Moore,et al.  Development and evaluation of a procedure for fitting multi-channel compression hearing aids. , 1998, British journal of audiology.

[30]  Michael K. Qin,et al.  Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  G E Loeb,et al.  Spatial cross-correlation , 1983, Biological Cybernetics.

[32]  N. Kiang,et al.  Acoustic trauma in cats. Cochlear pathology and auditory-nerve activity. , 1978, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[33]  L. Demany,et al.  Modulation detection by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1998, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[34]  John Bamford,et al.  Speech-hearing tests and the spoken language of hearing-impaired children , 1979 .

[35]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of a hearing aid on the speech-reception threshold of hearing-impaired listeners in quiet and in noise. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  B. Moore,et al.  Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. , 1989, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[37]  S P Bacon,et al.  Modulation detection, modulation masking, and speech understanding in noise in the elderly. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[38]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Moderate cochlear hearing loss leads to a reduced ability to use temporal fine structure information. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  C W Turner,et al.  Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  B C Moore,et al.  Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in the presence of interfering speech. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Discrimination of the fundamental frequency of complex tones with fixed and shifting spectral envelopes by normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects , 2003, Hearing Research.

[42]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[43]  B. Moore,et al.  A revised model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss , 2004, Hearing Research.

[44]  B C Moore,et al.  Detection of frequency modulation at low modulation rates: evidence for a mechanism based on phase locking. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  O Ghitza,et al.  On the upper cutoff frequency of the auditory critical-band envelope detectors in the context of speech perception. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[46]  Christian Lorenzi,et al.  The ability of listeners to use recovered envelope cues from speech fine structure. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  S. Bacon,et al.  The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[48]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Side effects of fast-acting dynamic range compression that affect intelligibility in a competing speech task. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[49]  M. Dorman,et al.  Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[50]  B. Moore An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1977 .

[51]  S. G. Nooteboom,et al.  Intonation and the perceptual separation of simultaneous voices , 1982 .

[52]  M W Skinner,et al.  Amplification bandwidth and intelligibility of speech in quiet and noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1983, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[53]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Frequency discrimination of complex tones by hearing-impaired subjects: Evidence for loss of ability to use temporal fine structure , 2006, Hearing Research.

[54]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues , 1995, Science.

[55]  R. Bracewell The Fourier Transform and Its Applications , 1966 .

[56]  Richard L Freyman,et al.  Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[57]  M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller,et al.  Cognitive aging and auditory information processing , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[58]  B. Moore,et al.  Frequency discrimination as a function of frequency, measured in several ways. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[59]  Deniz Başkent,et al.  Speech recognition in normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss as a function of the number of spectral channels. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[60]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  New Version of the TEN Test With Calibrations in dB HL , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[61]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Detection of frequency modulation by hearing-impaired listeners: effects of carrier frequency, modulation rate, and added amplitude modulation. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[62]  Emily Buss,et al.  Temporal Fine-Structure Cues to Speech and Pure Tone Modulation in Observers with Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[63]  B. Moore,et al.  Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[64]  M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller,et al.  Effect of age on detection of gaps in speech and nonspeech markers varying in duration and spectral symmetry. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[65]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[66]  E. D. Boer Pitch of Inharmonic Signals , 1956, Nature.

[67]  J M Festen,et al.  Relations between auditory functions in impaired hearing. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[68]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: vowels with different fundamental frequencies. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[69]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Factors affecting masking release for speech in modulated noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[70]  A. Palmer,et al.  Phase-locking in the cochlear nerve of the guinea-pig and its relation to the receptor potential of inner hair-cells , 1986, Hearing Research.

[71]  C. Turner,et al.  High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[72]  A. Ryan,et al.  Neural phase-locking properties in the absence of cochlear outer hair cells , 1981, Hearing Research.