Word recognition in competing babble and the effects of age, temporal processing, and absolute sensitivity.

This study was designed to clarify whether speech understanding in a fluctuating background is related to temporal processing as measured by the detection of gaps in noise bursts. Fifty adults with normal hearing or mild high-frequency hearing loss served as subjects. Gap detection thresholds were obtained using a three-interval, forced-choice paradigm. A 150-ms noise burst was used as the gap carrier with the gap placed close to carrier onset. A high-frequency masker without a temporal gap was gated on and off with the noise bursts. A continuous white-noise floor was present in the background. Word scores for the subjects were obtained at a presentation level of 55 dB HL in competing babble levels of 50, 55, and 60 dB HL. A repeated measures analysis of covariance of the word scores examined the effects of age, absolute sensitivity, and temporal sensitivity. The results of the analysis indicated that word scores in competing babble decreased significantly with increases in babble level, age, and gap detection thresholds. The effects of absolute sensitivity on word scores in competing babble were not significant. These results suggest that age and temporal processing influence speech understanding in fluctuating backgrounds in adults with normal hearing or mild high-frequency hearing loss.

[1]  B. Moore,et al.  Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. , 1989, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[2]  J. Dubno,et al.  Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  R. Plomp,et al.  Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. III. Additional data and final discussion , 1992 .

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

[5]  D. Frisina,et al.  Relationships among age-related differences in gap detection and word recognition. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Speech recognition thresholds in temporally complex backgrounds: Effects of hearing loss and noise masking , 1994 .

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

[8]  S Buus,et al.  Temporal gap detection in sensorineural and simulated hearing impairments. , 1984, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[9]  Robert D Frisina,et al.  Speech recognition in noise and presbycusis: relations to possible neural mechanisms , 1997, Hearing Research.

[10]  K. Snell,et al.  Age-related changes in temporal gap detection. , 1997, 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]  P L Divenyi,et al.  Audiological Correlates of Speech Understanding Deficits in Elderly Listeners with Mild‐to‐Moderate Hearing Loss. III. Factor Representation , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[13]  B. Moore,et al.  Gap detection and masking in hearing-impaired and normal-hearing subjects. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Andrew Stuart,et al.  Word Recognition in Continuous and Interrupted Broadband Noise by Young Normal‐Hearing, Older Normal‐Hearing, and Presbyacusic Listeners , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[15]  D. Grantham,et al.  Temporal processing in the aging auditory system. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  L E Humes,et al.  Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. , 1994, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[17]  Q Summerfield,et al.  Psychoacoustic and phonetic temporal processing in normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  K. Snell,et al.  The effect of temporal placement on gap detectability. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  A R Horwitz,et al.  Psychometric functions for gap detection in noise measured from young and aged subjects. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  R. G. Klumpp,et al.  Effects of Ambient Noise and Nearby Talkers on a Face‐to‐Face Communication Task , 1962 .