Across- and within-consonant errors for isolated syllables in noise.

PURPOSE A critical issue in assessing speech recognition involves understanding the factors that cause listeners to make errors. Models like the articulation index show that average error decreases logarithmically with increases in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The authors investigated (a) whether this log-linear relationship holds across consonants and for individual tokens and (b) what accounts for differences in error rates at the across- and within-consonant levels. METHOD Listeners with normal hearing heard CV syllables (16 consonants and 4 vowels) spoken by 14 talkers, presented at 6 SNRs. Stimuli were presented randomly, and listeners indicated which syllable they heard. RESULTS The log-linear relationship between error and SNR holds across consonants but breaks down at the token level. These 2 sources of variability (across- and within-consonant factors) explain the majority of listeners' errors. Moreover, simply adjusting for differences in token-level error thresholds explains 62% of the variability in listeners' responses. CONCLUSIONS These results demonstrate that speech tests must control for the large variability among tokens, not average across them, as is commonly done in clinical practice. Accounting for token-level differences in error thresholds with listeners with normal hearing provides a basis for tests designed to diagnostically evaluate individual differences with listeners with hearing impairment.

[1]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Within-consonant perceptual differences in the hearing impaired ear. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Individual Variability of Hearing-Impaired Consonant Perception , 2013, Seminars in Hearing.

[3]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  A psychoacoustic method for studying the necessary and sufficient perceptual cues of American English fricative consonants in noise. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Joseph C. Toscano,et al.  Cue-integration and context effects in speech: Evidence against speaking-rate normalization , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  The influence of stop consonants' perceptual features on the Articulation Index model. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  R. Dobie The AMA Method of Estimation of Hearing Disability: A Validation Study , 2011, Ear and hearing.

[7]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  A psychoacoustic method to find the perceptual cues of stop consonants in natural speech. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  René H. Gifford,et al.  Evidence for the Expansion of Adult Cochlear Implant Candidacy , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[9]  D. Barr Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression , 2008 .

[10]  Marion S Régnier,et al.  A method to identify noise-robust perceptual features: application for consonant /t/. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Consonant and vowel confusions in speech-weighted noise , 2007, INTERSPEECH.

[12]  Robert A Muenchen,et al.  Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use. , 2006, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[13]  이정학,et al.  미국의 Audiology 현황 , 2006 .

[14]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Articulation and Intelligibility , 2005, Synthesis Lectures on Speech and Audio Processing.

[15]  Jont B. Allen Consonant recognition and the articulation index. , 2005, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Hynek Hermansky,et al.  New nonsense syllables database - analyses and preliminary ASR experiments , 2004, INTERSPEECH.

[17]  D. Noffsinger,et al.  Subjective Measures of Hearing Aid Benefit in the NIDCD/VA Clinical Trial , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[18]  Thomas Brand,et al.  Evaluation of context effects in sentence recognition. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  J. Allen,et al.  Harvey Fletcher's role in the creation of communication acoustics. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  How do humans process and recognize speech? , 1993, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[21]  A. Bronkhorst,et al.  A model for context effects in speech recognition. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  C M Rankovic,et al.  An application of the articulation index to hearing aid fitting. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[23]  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.

[24]  D D Dirks,et al.  Application of the Articulation Index and the Speech Transmission Index to the recognition of speech by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1986, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[25]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  R. Plomp A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. , 1986, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[27]  D D Dirks,et al.  Speech recognition and the Articulation Index for normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  C. Fowler Segmentation of coarticulated speech in perception , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  B E Walden,et al.  Test of the assumptions underlying comparative hearing aid evaluations. , 1983, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[30]  D. Massaro,et al.  Phonological context in speech perception , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Ward Wd The American Medical Association/American Academy of Otolaryngology formula for determination of hearing handicap. , 1983 .

[32]  W D Ward The American Medical Association/American Academy of Otolaryngology formula for determination of hearing handicap. , 1983, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[33]  B. Repp Phonetic trading relations and context effects: new experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. , 1982, Psychological bulletin.

[34]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Speech-reception threshold for sentences as a function of age and noise level. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  D. Kleinbaum,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariate Methods , 1978 .

[36]  Harvey Fletcher,et al.  Speech and hearing. , 1930, Health services manager.

[37]  A M Liberman,et al.  Perception of the speech code. , 1967, Psychological review.

[38]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

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