Speech intelligibility for different spatial configurations of target speech and competing noise source in a horizontal and median plane

The speech intelligibility for different configurations of a target signal (speech) and masker (babble noise) in a horizontal and a median plane was investigated. The sources were placed at the front, in the back or in the right hand side (at different angular configurations) of a dummy head. The speech signals were presented to listeners via headphones at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). Three different types of listening mode (binaural and monaural for the right or left ear) were tested. It was found that the binaural mode gave the lowest, i.e. 'the best', speech reception threshold (SRT) values compared to the other modes, except for the cases when both the target and masker were at the same position. With regard to the monaural modes, SRTs were generally worse than those for the binaural mode. The new data gathered for the median plane revealed that a change in elevation of the speech source had a small, but statistically significant, influence on speech intelligibility. It was found that when speech elevation was increased, speech intelligibility decreased.

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

[2]  Nandini Iyer,et al.  Better-ear glimpsing efficiency with symmetrically-placed interfering talkers. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Soha N. Garadat,et al.  Speech intelligibility in free field: spatial unmasking in preschool children. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  G F Smoorenburg,et al.  Intelligibility of Dutch CVC syllables and sentences for listeners with normal hearing and with three types of hearing impairment. , 1995, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[6]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  R L Freyman,et al.  Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Simon Carlile,et al.  Contributions of talker characteristics and spatial location to auditory streaming. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  A. Bronkhorst,et al.  Multichannel speech intelligibility and talker recognition using monaural, binaural, and three-dimensional auditory presentation. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  John F Culling,et al.  The spatial unmasking of speech: evidence for better-ear listening. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Aleksander Sek,et al.  Speech intelligibility in various spatial configurations of backgroundnoise , 2005 .

[13]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  Speech intelligibility and spatial release from masking in young children. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Directivity of binaural noise reduction in spatial multiple noise-source arrangements for normal and impaired listeners. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R. Fay,et al.  Human Psychophysics , 1993, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research.

[16]  R M Cox,et al.  Comparison of objective and subjective measures of speech intelligibility in elderly hearing-impaired listeners. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[17]  B G Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Spatial unmasking of nearby speech sources in a simulated anechoic environment. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Spatial unmasking of nearby speech sources in a simulated anechoic environment , 2000 .

[19]  T Houtgast,et al.  Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  R L Freyman,et al.  The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Albert S Feng,et al.  GABA Is Involved in Spatial Unmasking in the Frog Auditory Midbrain , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  Douglas S Brungart,et al.  The effects of spatial separation in distance on the informational and energetic masking of a nearby speech signal. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Bosman Aj,et al.  Intelligibility of Dutch CVC Syllables and Sentences for Listeners with Normal Hearing and with Three Types of Hearing Impairment , 1995 .

[25]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: effect of location and type of interferer. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.