Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: Effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception

Consonant identification was measured for a stationary and amplitude-modulated noise masker in four listeners with flat cochlear hearing loss, and four age-matched normal-hearing listeners. The masker modulation rate was systematically varied between 2 and 128 Hz. Masking release (MR), that is better identification performance in fluctuating, than in stationary noise, was highest in a masker fluctuating at 8–16 Hz in all normal-hearing listeners. In comparison, MR was only observed in two out of the four impaired listeners. In these listeners, MR was poorer than normal, and peaked at lower rates, that is 2 or 8 Hz. MR corresponded to increased reception of information for voicing, place, and manner between 2 and 64 Hz in all normal-hearing listeners. In impaired listeners, increased reception of information was mainly observed for manner, and mainly reduced for place, but these differences were not significant. For all phonetic features, MR was observed at lower masker fluctuation rates (≤32 Hz) than in normal-hearing listeners. This study therefore shows that cochlear damage affects MR, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Sumario Se midió la identificación de consonantes con un ruido enmascarador estacionario y de amplitud modulada en cuatro sujetos con pérdidas auditivas cocleares planas, y en cuatro sujetos normo-oyentes de edades similares. La tasa de modulación del enmascarador se varió sistemáticamente entre 2 y 128 Hz. La sustracción del efecto de enmascaramiento (MR), que tiene un mejor desempeño de identificación con ruido fluctuante que con ruido estacionario, fue mayor con un enmascarador que fluctuó entre 8 y 16 Hz, en todos los sujetos normales. Comparativamente, el MR sólo se observó en dos de los cuatro sujetos hipoacúsicos. En estos sujetos, el MR fue menor al normal y su pico se obtuvo a tasas bajas, esto es, de 8 a 12 Hz. El MR en sujetos normo-oyentes correspondió a un incremento en la recepción de la información en sonoridad, punto y modo de articulación entre 2 y 64 Hz. En sujetos hipoacúsicos, se observó un aumento en la recepción de información en modo, y aunque se vio reducida principalmente en cuanto al punto de articulación, estas diferencias no fueron significativas. Para todas las características fonéticas, el MR se observó a tasas más bajas de fluctuación (≤32 Hz) que en los sujetos normo-oyentes. Este estudio, por consiguiente, muestra que el daño coclear afecta el MR tanto cualitativa como cuantitativamente.

[1]  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.

[2]  Jayne B Ahlstrom,et al.  Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Michael K. Qin,et al.  Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  S. Rosen,et al.  Uncomodulated glimpsing in "checkerboard" noise. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Frédéric Berthommier,et al.  Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise , 2006, Hearing Research.

[6]  Thomas Baer,et al.  Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing‐impaired and normally hearing people , 1997 .

[7]  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.

[8]  B. Moore,et al.  Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  THE PERCEPTION OF SPEECH IN FLUCTUATING NOISE , 1993 .

[10]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modulations. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  S P Bacon,et al.  Modulation detection, modulation masking, and speech understanding in noise in the elderly. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[12]  H. Gustafsson,et al.  Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Peggy B Nelson,et al.  Understanding speech in modulated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[15]  B. Moore,et al.  Temporal modulation transfer functions for band-limited noise in subjects with cochlear hearing loss. , 1992, British journal of audiology.

[16]  B C Moore,et al.  Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Michelle R. Molis,et al.  Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[18]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Erratum: An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 339 (1955)] , 1955 .

[19]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The Intelligibility of Interrupted Speech , 1948 .

[20]  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.