Use of a simultaneous sentence perception test to enhance sensitivity to ease of listening.

The purpose of the study was to determine if a divided-attention, sentence-recall task was more sensitive to distortion of the speech signal than a conventional focused-attention task. The divided-attention task required listeners to repeat both of two sentences delivered simultaneously to the same ear. The focused-attention task required listeners to repeat a single sentence presented to one ear in quiet or in amplitude-modulated noise (0 dB signal-to-noise ratio). Distortion was introduced by peak clipping. Eighteen listeners with normal hearing were tested under three levels of peak clipping: 0 dB, 11 dB, and 29 dB (re: waveform peak). The effects of clipping were similar, on average, for simultaneous sentences and single sentences in noise. When data were separated by sentence length, however, the effects of clipping were found to be greater for the simultaneous-sentence task, but only for the short sentences (6 words or fewer). The simultaneous-sentence test, in its present form, is not more sensitive to the effects of clipping than is a single-sentence test in noise. Modification of the simultaneous-sentence test to include only short sentences, however, may provide greater test sensitivity than more conventional tests using single sentences in noise.

[1]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[2]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Effect of Peak Clipping on Speech Recognition Threshold , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[3]  J. F. Feuerstein.  Monaural versus binaural hearing: ease of listening, word recognition, and attentional effort. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[4]  D. Kahneman.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[5]  Robert C. Bilger,et al.  Standardization of a Test of Speech Perception in Noise , 1984 .

[6]  R N Kasten,et al.  Hearing aid distortion and consonant identification. , 1971, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[7]  P F Seitz,et al.  Assessing the Cognitive Demands of Speech Listening for People with Hearing Losses , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[8]  D. Broadbent.  Perception and communication , 1958 .

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

[10]  D W Downs,et al.  Processing demands during auditory learning under degraded listening conditions. , 1978, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[11]  B C Moore,et al.  Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: effects on intelligibility, quality, and response times. , 1993, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[12]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[13]  H Levitt,et al.  A comparison of response time and word recognition measures using a word-monitoring and closed-set identification task. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[14]  J. C. R. Licklider,et al.  Effects of Amplitude Distortion upon the Intelligibility of Speech , 1946 .

[15]  N Moray,et al.  Where is capacity limited? A survey and a model. , 1967, Acta psychologica.

[16]  A. Boothroyd,et al.  Voice Fundamental Frequency as an Auditory Supplement to the Speechreading of Sentences , 1988, Ear and hearing.