The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners.

Weak consonants (e.g., stops) are more susceptible to noise than vowels, owing partially to their lower intensity. This raises the question whether hearing-impaired (HI) listeners are able to perceive (and utilize effectively) the high-frequency cues present in consonants. To answer this question, HI listeners were presented with clean (noise absent) weak consonants in otherwise noise-corrupted sentences. Results indicated that HI listeners received significant benefit in intelligibility (4 dB decrease in speech reception threshold) when they had access to clean consonant information. At extremely low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) levels, however, HI listeners received only 64% of the benefit obtained by normal-hearing listeners. This lack of equitable benefit was investigated in Experiment 2 by testing the hypothesis that the high-frequency cues present in consonants were not audible to HI listeners. This was tested by selectively amplifying the noisy consonants while leaving the noisy sonorant sounds (e.g., vowels) unaltered. Listening tests indicated small (∼10%), but statistically significant, improvements in intelligibility at low SNR conditions when the consonants were amplified in the high-frequency region. Selective consonant amplification provided reliable low-frequency acoustic landmarks that in turn facilitated a better lexical segmentation of the speech stream and contributed to the small improvement in intelligibility.

[1]  S. Gordon-Salant,et al.  Effects of acoustic modification on consonant recognition by elderly hearing-impaired subjects. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements , 1969, IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics.

[3]  E D Schubert,et al.  Vowel discrimination of hearing-impaired listeners. , 1968, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  E D Schubert,et al.  Consonant phonemic errors associated with pure-tone configurations and certain kinds of hearing impairment. , 1972, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[5]  Philipos C Loizou,et al.  The contribution of obstruent consonants and acoustic landmarks to speech recognition in noise. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  M W Skinner,et al.  Speech intelligibility in noise-induced hearing loss: effects of high-frequency compensation. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  S. Gordon-Salant Recognition of natural and time/intensity altered CVs by young and elderly subjects with normal hearing. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  Ning Li,et al.  Masking release and the contribution of obstruent consonants on speech recognition in noise by cochlear implant users. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Brent Edwards,et al.  Hearing Aids and Hearing Impairment , 2004 .

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

[11]  G Keidser,et al.  NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. , 2001, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[12]  Peter F. Assmann,et al.  The Perception of Speech Under Adverse Conditions , 2004 .

[13]  Jae Hee Lee,et al.  Contribution of consonant versus vowel information to sentence intelligibility for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  R. Port,et al.  Consonant/vowel ratio as a cue for voicing in English , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  R L Freyman,et al.  The importance of consonant-vowel intensity ratio in the intelligibility of voiceless consonants. , 1989, Journal of speech and hearing research.

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

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

[18]  B. Moore Dead Regions in the Cochlea: Diagnosis, Perceptual Consequences, and Implications for the Fitting of Hearing Aids , 2001, Trends in amplification.

[19]  E W Yund,et al.  Multichannel compression hearing aids: effect of number of channels on speech discrimination in noise. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Kenneth N Stevens,et al.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  A A Montgomery,et al.  Evaluation of two speech enhancement techniques to improve intelligibility for hearing-impaired adults. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  P. Luce,et al.  Contextual effects on vowel duration, closure duration, and the consonant/vowel ratio in speech production. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Philipos C. Loizou,et al.  Speech Enhancement: Theory and Practice , 2007 .

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

[25]  Ruth Bentler,et al.  Digital Noise Reduction: An Overview , 2006, Trends in amplification.

[26]  M. Robb,et al.  Audibility and recognition of stop consonants in normal and hearing-impaired subjects. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  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.

[28]  R. Bentler,et al.  Digital noise reduction: Outcomes from laboratory and field studies , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[29]  P. Loizou,et al.  The influence of noise on vowel and consonant cues. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Philipos C Loizou,et al.  Factors influencing glimpsing of speech in noise. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Hideki Kawahara,et al.  Restructuring speech representations using a pitch-adaptive time-frequency smoothing and an instantaneous-frequency-based F0 extraction: Possible role of a repetitive structure in sounds , 1999, Speech Commun..

[32]  R L Freyman,et al.  Effect of consonant-vowel ratio modification on amplitude envelope cues for consonant recognition. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[33]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  Long-term and short-term characteristics of speech: implications for hearing aid selection for young children. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[34]  M. Davies,et al.  Endovascular treatment of tracheoinnominate artery fistula: a case report. , 2006, Vascular and endovascular surgery.