Modeling speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.

The speech intelligibility index (SII) is an often used calculation method for estimating the proportion of audible speech in noise. For speech reception thresholds (SRTs), measured in normally hearing listeners using various types of stationary noise, this model predicts a fairly constant speech proportion of about 0.33, necessary for Dutch sentence intelligibility. However, when the SII model is applied for SRTs in quiet, the estimated speech proportions are often higher, and show a larger inter-subject variability, than found for speech in noise near normal speech levels [65 dB sound pressure level (SPL)]. The present model attempts to alleviate this problem by including cochlear compression. It is based on a loudness model for normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners of Moore and Glasberg [(2004). Hear. Res. 188, 70-88]. It estimates internal excitation levels for speech and noise and then calculates the proportion of speech above noise and threshold using similar spectral weighting as used in the SII. The present model and the standard SII were used to predict SII values in quiet and in stationary noise for normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The present model predicted SIIs for three listener types (normal hearing, noise-induced, and age-induced hearing loss) with markedly less variability than the standard SII.

[1]  R. Drullman Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility , 1994 .

[2]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Factors affecting masking release for speech in modulated noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  James M Kates,et al.  Coherence and the speech intelligibility index. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Prediction and statistical evaluation of speech recognition test scores. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[6]  B. Moore,et al.  Frequency selectivity as a function of level and frequency measured with uniformly exciting notched noise. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  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.

[8]  L. Robles,et al.  Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Wouter A Dreschler,et al.  The relationship between the intelligibility of time-compressed speech and speech in noise in young and elderly listeners. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  T. Houtgast,et al.  A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria , 1985 .

[11]  K. S. Rhebergen,et al.  Extended speech intelligibility index for the prediction of the speech reception threshold in fluctuating noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Hannes Müsch Review and computer implementation of Fletcher and Galt’s method of calculating the Articulation Index , 2001 .

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

[14]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Intensity-importance functions for bandlimited monosyllabic words. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech dynamic range and its effect on cochlear implant performance. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Frequency-importance and transfer functions for the Auditec of St. Louis recordings of the NU-6 word test. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[17]  Teresa Y C Ching,et al.  Methods and Applications of the Audibility Index in Hearing Aid Selection and Fitting , 2002, Trends in amplification.

[18]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Basilar-membrane nonlinearity and the growth of forward masking. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Gerald A. Studebaker,et al.  Audibility-Index Functions for the Connected Speech Test , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[20]  G F Smoorenburg,et al.  Speech reception in quiet and in noisy conditions by individuals with noise-induced hearing loss in relation to their tone audiogram. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Charactering the individual ear by the "Auditory Profile" , 2008 .

[22]  I. Russell,et al.  The location of the cochlear amplifier: spatial representation of a single tone on the guinea pig basilar membrane. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  Michelle R. Molis,et al.  Effects of high presentation levels on recognition of low- and high-frequency speech , 2003 .

[24]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Use of the articulation index for assessing residual auditory function in listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  C V Pavlovic Speech spectrum considerations and speech intelligibility predictions in hearing aid evaluations. , 1989, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[26]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Prediction of absolute thresholds and equal-loudness contours using a modified loudness model. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Audibility-Index Predictions of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners’ Performance on the Connected Speech Test , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[28]  A. Oxenham,et al.  A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  D Byrne,et al.  Maximizing Effective Audibility in Hearing Aid Fitting , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[30]  L. Robles,et al.  Basilar membrane mechanics at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. I. Input-output functions, tuning curves, and response phases. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  C V Pavlovic Band Importance Functions for Audiological Applications , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[32]  A. Oxenham,et al.  A further test of the linearity of temporal summation in forward masking. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  I M Noordhoek,et al.  Measuring the threshold for speech reception by adaptive variation of the signal bandwidth. I. Normal-hearing listeners. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  R. Plomp,et al.  The Reception Threshold of Interrupted Speech for Hearing-Impaired Listeners , 1983 .

[35]  Dianne J. Van Tasell,et al.  Hearing Loss, Speech, and Hearing Aids , 1993 .

[36]  B. Moore,et al.  Modelling Changes in Frequency Selectivity with Level , 1999 .

[37]  R Drullman,et al.  Speech intelligibility in noise: relative contribution of speech elements above and below the noise level. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  I M Noordhoek,et al.  Measuring the threshold for speech reception by adaptive variation of the signal bandwidth. II. Hearing-impaired listeners. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  Todd A Ricketts,et al.  The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. II. Sloping hearing loss. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Psychophysical Manifestations of Compression: Hearing-Impaired Listeners , 2004 .

[41]  Z Hou,et al.  A Model to Evaluate and Maximize Hearing Aid Performance by Integrating the Articulation Index Across Listening Conditions , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[42]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  DETECTION OF DECREMENTS AND INCREMENTS IN SINUSOIDS AT HIGH OVERALL LEVELS , 1995 .

[43]  I M Noordhoek,et al.  Relations between intelligibility of narrow-band speech and auditory functions, both in the 1-kHz frequency region. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[47]  K. S. Rhebergen,et al.  A Speech Intelligibility Index-based approach to predict the speech reception threshold for sentences in fluctuating noise for normal-hearing listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[48]  Bosman Aj,et al.  Intelligibility of Dutch CVC Syllables and Sentences for Listeners with Normal Hearing and with Three Types of Hearing Impairment , 1995 .

[49]  Harvey Fletcher,et al.  Errata: The Perception of Speech and Its Relation to Telephony [J. Acous. Soc. Am. 22, 89 (1950)] , 1950 .

[50]  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.

[51]  B. Moore,et al.  A Model of Loudness Applicable to Time-Varying Sounds , 2002 .

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

[53]  R M Cox,et al.  Distribution of short-term rms levels in conversational speech. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[54]  C M Rankovic Factors governing speech reception benefits of adaptive linear filtering for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[55]  Bertram Schaf Chapter Five – Critical Bands , 1970 .

[56]  M. Ruggero Responses to sound of the basilar membrane of the mammalian cochlea , 1992, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[57]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Speech intelligibility prediction in hearing-impaired listeners based on a psychoacoustically motivated perception model. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[58]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Regression equations for the transfer functions of ANSI S3.5-1969. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[59]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Modeling the Effects of Peripheral Nonlinearity in Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing , 2019, Modeling Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

[60]  D A Nelson,et al.  The effect of basilar-membrane nonlinearity on the shapes of masking period patterns in normal and impaired hearing. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[61]  H. Dillon,et al.  An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra , 1994 .

[62]  Articulation index: Importance function in the intensity domain , 1990 .

[63]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Age-related changes in monosyllabic word recognition performance when audibility is held constant. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[64]  R Plomp,et al.  The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[65]  T Houtgast,et al.  Effects of degradation of intensity, time, or frequency content on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[66]  Bryce E. Lobdell,et al.  A model of the VU (volume-unit) meter, with speech applications. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[67]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Cochlear Compression: Perceptual Measures and Implications for Normal and Impaired Hearing , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[68]  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.

[69]  C Ludvigsen Prediction of speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and cochlearly hearing-impaired listeners. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[70]  Timothy D Trine,et al.  SII and fit-to-target analysis of compression system performance as a function of number of compression channels , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[71]  K. D. Kryter Methods for the Calculation and Use of the Articulation Index , 1962 .

[72]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[73]  B C Moore,et al.  Intensity discrimination: a severe departure from Weber's law. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[74]  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.

[75]  Wouter A Dreschler,et al.  Prediction of the Intelligibility for Speech in Real-Life Background Noises for Subjects With Normal Hearing , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[76]  Todd A Ricketts,et al.  The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[77]  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.

[78]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Speech Spectra for Six Recorded Monosyllabic Word Tests , 1993, Ear and hearing.

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

[80]  B. Moore,et al.  A revised model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss , 2004, Hearing Research.

[81]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.