Comparison of performance with wide dynamic range compression and linear amplification.

This study compared subject performance and preference using a compression-limiting hearing aid set to linear amplification (program 1) and wide dynamic range compression (WDRC, program 2). The frequency responses of the hearing aid were matched to a 65 dB SPL signal and maximum output to a 90 dB SPL signal. Twenty subjects with moderate to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss were tested. Speech recognition scores and speech reception thresholds were obtained both in quiet and in noise. Subjective preference for WDRC or linear amplification was measured via a paired-comparison procedure on "loudness appropriateness," "clarity," and "pleasantness" to continuous discourse presented in quiet and in noise. Results suggested that WDRC yielded better speech intelligibility in quiet for low-level signals and no difference in speech intelligibility in noise compared to linear amplification. Subjects preferred WDRC for loudness to both high- and low-level signals and for pleasantness to high-level signals.

[1]  S. Soli,et al.  Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  B Hagerman,et al.  Perceived sound quality in a hearing aid with vented and closed earmould equalized in frequency response. , 1992, Scandinavian audiology.

[3]  D B Hawkins,et al.  A comparison of sound quality judgments for monaural and binaural hearing aid processed stimuli. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[4]  F K Kuk Theoretical and Practical Considerations in Compression Hearing Aids , 1996, Trends in amplification.

[5]  W A Dreschler,et al.  The effect of specific compression settings on phoneme identification in hearing-impaired subjects. , 1988, Scandinavian audiology.

[6]  I V Nábĕlek Performance of hearing-impaired listeners under various types of amplitude compression. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  P. Ladefoged A course in phonetics , 1975 .

[8]  B C Moore,et al.  Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[9]  O J Menzel Compression amplification in hearing aids. , 1966, Eye, ear, nose & throat monthly.

[10]  B Kollmeier,et al.  The effect of multichannel dynamic compression on speech intelligibility. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  D Byrne,et al.  Hearing aid selection for the 1990s: where to? , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[12]  P. A. Yantis,et al.  The effect of automatic gain control in hearing-impaired listeners with different dynamic ranges. , 1990, Ear and hearing.

[13]  Robert D. Rodman,et al.  An Introduction to Language , 1984 .

[14]  F K Kuk,et al.  The effects of "noise suppression" hearing aids on consonant recognition in speech-babble and low-frequency noise. , 1989, Ear and hearing.

[15]  Yund Ew,et al.  Discrimination of multichannel-compressed speech in noise: long-term learning in hearing-impaired subjects , 1995 .

[16]  Gerald A. Studebaker,et al.  The Vanderbilt Hearing Aid Report II , 1991 .

[17]  W A Dreschler Dynamic-range reduction by peak clipping or compression and its effects on phoneme perception in hearing-impaired listeners. , 1988, Scandinavian audiology.

[18]  V Pluvinage,et al.  Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[19]  Michael Valente,et al.  Hearing AIDS: Standards, Options, and Limitations , 1996 .

[20]  R Plomp 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.

[21]  A Boothroyd,et al.  Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  B. Dodd,et al.  Consonant perception with linear and compression amplification. , 1995, Scandinavian audiology.

[23]  W A Dreschler,et al.  The use of single-channel compression for the improvement of speech intelligibility. , 1984, Scandinavian audiology.

[24]  Peterson Me,et al.  The effect of automatic gain control in hearing-impaired listeners with different dynamic ranges. , 1990 .

[25]  Mark B. Gardner,et al.  The Dependence of Hearing Impairment on Sound Intensity , 1937 .

[26]  H Dillon Tutorial Compression? Yes, But for Low or High Frequencies, for Low or High Intensities, and with What Response Times? , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[27]  B C Moore,et al.  Optimization of a slow-acting automatic gain control system for use in hearing aids. , 1991, British journal of audiology.

[28]  W A Dreschler,et al.  Syllabic compression and speech intelligibility in hearing impaired listeners. , 1993, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[29]  C C Lau,et al.  Material for Cantonese speech audiometry constructed by appropriate phonetic principles. , 1988, British journal of audiology.