Derivation of frequency importance functions for the AzBio sentences.

Although the AzBio test is well validated, has effective standardization data available, and is highly recommended for Cochlear Implant (CI) evaluation, no attempt has been made to derive a Frequency Importance Function (FIF) for its stimuli. This study derived FIFs for the AzBio sentence lists using listeners with normal hearing. Traditional procedures described in studies by Studebaker and Sherbecoe [(1991). J. Speech. Lang. Hear. Res. 34, 427-438] were applied for this purpose. Participants with normal hearing listened to a large number of AzBio sentences that were high- and low-pass filtered under speech-spectrum shaped noise at various signal-to-noise ratios. Frequency weights for the AzBio sentences were greatest in the 1.5 to 2 kHz frequency regions as is the case with other speech materials. A cross-procedure comparison was conducted between the traditional procedure [Studebaker and Sherbecoe (1991). J. Speech. Lang. Hear. Res. 34, 427-438] and the nonlinear optimization procedure [Kates (2013). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, EL459-EL464]. Consecutive data analyses provided speech recognition scores for the AzBio sentences in relation to the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII). The findings of the authors provide empirically derived FIFs for the AzBio test that can be used for future studies. It is anticipated that the accuracy of predicting SIIs for CI patients will be improved when using these derived FIFs for the AzBio test.

[1]  D D Dirks,et al.  Frequency-importance functions for words in high- and low-context sentences. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[2]  Eric W Healy,et al.  Band importance for sentences and words reexamined. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  A Parkinson,et al.  Channel weights for speech recognition in cochlear implant users. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Sigfrid D Soli,et al.  Development of the Cantonese speech intelligibility index. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Monita Chatterjee,et al.  Band importance functions of listeners with cochlear implants using clinical maps. , 2016, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Eric W Healy,et al.  The role of contrasting temporal amplitude patterns in the perception of speech. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Fei Chen,et al.  Predicting the Intelligibility of Vocoded Speech , 2011, Ear and hearing.

[8]  C. Turner,et al.  Frequency-weighting functions for broadband speech as estimated by a correlational method. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  C V Pavlovic.  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.

[10]  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.

[11]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Frequency-importance and transfer functions for recorded CID W-22 word lists. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[12]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  A frequency importance function for continuous discourse. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  C. Turner,et al.  Use of a correlational method to estimate a listener's weighting function for speech. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  H J McDermott,et al.  The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  L E Humes,et al.  An evaluation of several rationales for selecting hearing aid gain. , 1986, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[16]  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.

[17]  M. Dorman,et al.  Performance of Patients Using Different Cochlear Implant Systems: Effects of Input Dynamic Range , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[18]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Effects of Minimum Stimulation Settings for the Med El Tempo+ Speech Processor on Speech Understanding , 2005, Ear and hearing.

[19]  In-Ki Jin,et al.  Derivations of the band-importance function: A cross-procedure comparison. , 2015, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Ming-Wen Kuo.  Frequency importance functions for words and sentences in Mandarin Chinese : implications for hearing aid prescriptions in tonal languages , 2013 .

[21]  Larry E Humes,et al.  Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  James M Kates.  Improved estimation of frequency importance functions. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  René H. Gifford,et al.  Speech Recognition Materials and Ceiling Effects: Considerations for Cochlear Implant Programs , 2008, Audiology and Neurotology.

[24]  Stefano Cosentino,et al.  Objective speech intelligibility measurement for cochlear implant users in complex listening environments , 2013, Speech Commun..

[25]  Richard M Warren,et al.  Intelligibilities of 1-octave rectangular bands spanning the speech spectrum when heard separately and paired. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[27]  P. Marchand,et al.  Binomial smoothing filter: A way to avoid some pitfalls of least‐squares polynomial smoothing , 1983 .

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

[29]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  NAL-NL1: A new procedure for fitting non-linear hearing aids , 1999 .

[30]  H. Fletcher,et al.  The Perception of Speech and Its Relation to Telephony , 1950 .

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

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

[33]  M. Dorman,et al.  Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices. , 2004, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[34]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Linguistic Considerations in the Study of Speech Intelligibility , 1959 .

[35]  S. Scollie.  Children’s Speech Recognition Scores: The Speech Intelligibility Index and Proficiency Factors for Age and Hearing Level , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[36]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Development and Validation of the AzBio Sentence Lists , 2012, Ear and hearing.

[37]  D D Dirks,et al.  Subjective judgements of clarity and intelligibility for filtered stimuli with equivalent speech intelligibility index predictions. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[38]  Eric W Healy,et al.  Use of a compound approach to derive auditory-filter-wide frequency-importance functions for vowels and consonants. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  C. P. Janota,et al.  Frequency importance functions for words, sentences, and continuous discourse. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[40]  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.

[41]  Qiang Huang,et al.  Frequency importance function of the speech intelligibility index for Mandarin Chinese , 2016, Speech Commun..

[42]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Frequency importance functions for a feature recognition test material. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.