THE PERCEPTION OF SPEECH IN FLUCTUATING NOISE

Various phenomena associated with the perception of speech in fluctuating noise were investigated using a small set of VCV (Vowel-Consonant-Vowel) stimuli. In experiments 1 and 2, the performance intensity function and the speech reception threshold were measured for the speech in noise backgrounds which fluctuated on various time-scales. It was found that very rapid fluctuations in the masker had no effect on speech perception, whilst a masker containing fluctuations of medium duration (80 to 100's of milliseconds) provided a release from masking but did not affect the relative intelligibility of each consonant, nor the pattern of confusions. A noise environment containing longer interruptions (of duration 1 second) produced a flattening of the performance intensity function and a randomisation of the types of phonetic confusion occurring. In experiments 3 and 4, the effect on the speech reception threshold of varying the duration and magnitude of fluctuations was studied. It was found that the ability of subjects to ''glimpse'' speech information, which may be used to explain the release of masking, depends strongly upon both the duration of the quiet sections of the noise and also upon their magnitude. A method for quantifying the fluctuation of a speech masker is proposed and examples of the analysis are given for cafeteria noise, and white noise shaped to possess similar frequency content. The analysis shows no differences in the fluctuation of the two noises likely to influence speech intelligibility, a result confirmed by experiment

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

[2]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  The Masking of Pure Tones and of Speech by White Noise , 1950 .

[3]  C Speaks,et al.  Effect of a competing message on synthetic sentence identification. , 1967, Journal of speech and hearing research.

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

[5]  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.

[6]  M P Haggard,et al.  The four alternative auditory feature test (FAAF)--linguistic and psychometric properties of the material with normative data in noise. , 1987, British journal of audiology.

[7]  H P Wit,et al.  Amplitude and frequency fluctuations of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  J C Cooper,et al.  Speech discrimination in noise. , 1971, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[9]  S. Gordon-Salant,et al.  Phoneme feature perception in noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. , 1985, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[10]  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.

[11]  D D Dirks,et al.  A procedure for quantifying the effects of noise on speech recognition. , 1982, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[12]  W M Hartmann,et al.  Noise power fluctuations and the masking of sine signals. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  J. M. Festen Speech-Reception Threshold in a Fluctuating Background Sound and its Possible Relation to Temporal Auditory Resolution , 1987 .

[14]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[17]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The masking of speech. , 1947, Psychological bulletin.