A method for measuring the intelligibility of uninterrupted, continuous speech.

Speech-in-noise tests commonly use short, discrete sentences as representative samples of everyday speech. These tests cannot, however, fully represent the added demands of understanding ongoing, linguistically complex speech. Using a new monitoring method to measure the intelligibility of continuous speech and a standard trial-by-trial, speech-in-noise test the effects of target duration and linguistic complexity were examined. For a group of older hearing-impaired listeners, significantly higher speech reception thresholds were found for continuous, complex speech targets than for syntactically simple sentences. The results highlight the need to sample speech intelligibility in a variety of everyday speech-in-noise scenarios.

[1]  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.

[2]  Mark Huckvale,et al.  Performance-Based Measurement of Speech Quality with an Audio Proof-Reading Task , 2012 .

[3]  W. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[4]  A. Treisman.  THE EFFECT OF IRRELEVANT MATERIAL ON THE EFFICIENCY OF SELECTIVE LISTENING. , 1964, The American journal of psychology.

[5]  COMPARATIVE INTELLIGIBILITY OF WORD LISTS AND CONTINUOUS DISCOURSE. , 1963, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[6]  B. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Selective Attention in Normal and Impaired Hearing , 2008, Trends in amplification.

[7]  M. Daneman,et al.  How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  R. Flesch.  A new readability yardstick. , 1948, The Journal of applied psychology.

[9]  Jing Xia,et al.  A naturalistic approach to the cocktail party problem. , 2013, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[10]  Pablo Romero-Fresco,et al.  Subtitling Through Speech Recognition: Respeaking , 2014 .

[11]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  The Masking of Pure Tones and of Speech by White Noise , 1950 .

[12]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA Noises: Artificial Noise Signals with Speech-like Spectral and Temporal Properties for Hearing Instrument Assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos , 2001 .

[13]  Richard L Freyman,et al.  Effect of number of masking talkers and auditory priming on informational masking in speech recognition. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  M. Mcmahon.  Development of Reading-While-Listening Skills in the Primary Grades. , 1983 .

[15]  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.

[16]  C Speaks,et al.  Intelligibility of connected discourse. , 1972, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[17]  F A Wichmann,et al.  Ning for Helpful Comments and Suggestions. This Paper Benefited Con- Siderably from Conscientious Peer Review, and We Thank Our Reviewers the Psychometric Function: I. Fitting, Sampling, and Goodness of Fit , 2001 .

[18]  Alexandra MacPherson.  The factors affectng the psychometric function for speech intelligibility , 2013 .