Recognition of low-pass-filtered consonants in noise with normal and impaired high-frequency hearing.

People with high-frequency hearing loss often complain of difficulty understanding speech, particularly in noisy environments. The reduction in audible high-frequency speech information provides one explanation. In addition, high-frequency hearing loss may reduce the contribution from the "tails" of high-frequency auditory nerve fibers, resulting in diminished availability of lower frequency speech cues. This study was designed to determine if high-frequency hearing loss results in speech-understanding deficits beyond those accounted for by reduced high-frequency speech information. Recognition of speech, both low-pass filtered and unfiltered, was measured for subjects with normal hearing and those with hearing loss limited to high frequencies. Nonsense syllables were presented in three levels of noise that was spectrally shaped to match the long-term spectrum of the speech. Scores for subjects with impaired high-frequency hearing were significantly poorer than scores for subjects with normal hearing. In the case of the low-pass-filtered speech, performance differences between groups could not be attributed to differences in speech audibility, as high-frequency speech cues were absent for all subjects. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that high-frequency fibers encode useful low-frequency speech information.

[1]  Speech recognition in a special case of low-frequency hearing loss. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  J R Dubno,et al.  Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  G. Studebaker A "rationalized" arcsine transform. , 1985, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  Mary Florentine,et al.  Gap Detection in Normal and Impaired Listeners: The Effect of Level and Frequency , 1985 .

[5]  M Florentine,et al.  Intensity discrimination as a function of level and frequency and its relation to high-frequency hearing. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  R. A. Schmiedt,et al.  Age-related loss of activity of auditory-nerve fibers. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  M. D. Wang,et al.  Consonant confusions in noise: a study of perceptual features. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  I. Hirsh,et al.  Masking of Tones by Bands of Noise , 1956 .

[9]  J R Dubno,et al.  Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Is useful speech information carried by fibers with high characteristic frequencies? , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  N. Viemeister,et al.  Temporal modulation transfer functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1985, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[12]  R. Keith,et al.  Remote masking for listeners with cochlear impairment. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[14]  J R Dubno,et al.  Masked thresholds and consonant recognition in low-pass maskers for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  P X Joris,et al.  Enhancement of neural synchronization in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus. II. Responses in the tuning curve tail. , 1994, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  C. Turner,et al.  Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. , 1999, American journal of audiology.

[17]  M. Liberman,et al.  Afferent and efferent innervation of the cat cochlea: Quantitative analysis with light and electron microscopy , 1990, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[18]  W. Jesteadt,et al.  Forward masking as a function of frequency, masker level, and signal delay. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  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.

[20]  J R Dubno,et al.  Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  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.

[22]  J. C. Steinberg,et al.  Factors Governing the Intelligibility of Speech Sounds , 1945 .

[23]  D D Dirks,et al.  Speech recognition in amplitude-modulated noise of listeners with normal and listeners with impaired hearing. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[24]  M R Leek,et al.  Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  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.

[26]  D. M. Green,et al.  A maximum-likelihood method for estimating thresholds in a yes-no task. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  N. Kiang,et al.  Tails of tuning curves of auditory-nerve fibers. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  Effects of frequency on the detection of decrements and increments in sinusoids , 1993 .