Subjective ratings of noise-reduction hearing aids.

The effectiveness of seven commercially available noise-reduction hearing aids was evaluated using subjective ratings of continuous discourse. Subjective scales of listening comfort, speech quality, speech understanding, noise interference, and overall liking were used. Fifteen experienced hearing-aid users participated. Two hearing aids that used amplitude compression (Audiotone A-54 and Telex 363C), two hearing aids that used the Zeta Noise Blocker (two versions of a Maico SP147), and three hearing aids that proportionally attenuated the low-frequencies (Rion HB-69AS, Richards ASE-B, and Siemens 283 ASP) were evaluated. None of the noise-reduction hearing aids significantly altered group performance on any subjective scale. Individually, however, subjects responded differently to different noise-reduction hearing aids, indicating that some noise-reduction hearing aids may help some hearing-impaired individuals.

[1]  J L Punch,et al.  Relative effects of low-frequency amplification on syllable recognition and speech quality. , 1986, Ear and hearing.

[2]  Punch Jl,et al.  Quality judgments of hearing aid-processed speech and music by normal and otopathologic listeners. , 1978 .

[3]  S ZERLIN,et al.  A new approach to hearing-aid selection. , 1962, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Paired comparison judgments of relative intelligibility in noise. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  L K Stein,et al.  Listener‐Assessed Intelligibility of a Hearing Aid Self‐Adaptive Noise Filter , 1984, Ear and hearing.

[6]  Ability of hearing-impaired listeners to understand connected discourse. , 1977 .

[7]  B C Moore,et al.  Auditory filter asymmetry in the hearing impaired. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  J. M. Pickett,et al.  Some Masking Effects Produced by Low-Frequency Vowel Formants in Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 1975 .

[9]  J L Punch,et al.  Pairwise listener preferences in hearing aid evaluation. , 1981, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[10]  Fabry Da,et al.  Effects of an adaptive filter hearing aid on speech recognition in noise by hearing-impaired subjects. , 1988 .

[11]  Hallowell Davis,et al.  Book Reviews: Hearing Aids: An Experimental Study of Design Objectives , 1948 .

[12]  R M Cox,et al.  Intelligibility ratings of continuous discourse: application to hearing aid selection. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  F K Kuk,et al.  The effects of "noise suppression" hearing aids on consonant recognition in speech-babble and low-frequency noise. , 1989, Ear and hearing.

[14]  B E Walden,et al.  Multidimensional scaling of quality judgments of speech signals processed by hearing aids. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  J M Pickett,et al.  Sensorineural hearing loss and upward spread of masking. , 1970, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[16]  D P Goldstein,et al.  Effect of Low‐Frequency Hearing Aid Response on Four Measures of Speech Perception , 1984, Ear and hearing.

[17]  J J Dempsey.  Effect of Automatic Signal-Processing Amplification on Speech Recognition in Noise for Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 1987, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.