Relation Between Listening Effort and Speech Intelligibility in Noise.

Purpose Subjective ratings of listening effort might be applicable to estimate hearing difficulties at positive signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) at which speech intelligibility scores are near 100%. Hence, ratings of listening effort were compared with speech intelligibility scores at different SNRs, and the benefit of hearing aids was evaluated. Method Two groups of listeners, 1 with normal hearing and 1 with hearing impairment, performed adaptive speech intelligibility and adaptive listening effort tests (Adaptive Categorical Listening Effort Scaling; Krueger, Schulte, Brand, & Holube, 2017) with sentences of the Oldenburg Sentence Test (Wagener, Brand, & Kollmeier, 1999a, 1999b; Wagener, Kühnel, & Kollmeier, 1999) in 4 different maskers. Model functions were fitted to the data to estimate the speech reception threshold and listening effort ratings for extreme effort and no effort. Results Listeners with hearing impairment showed higher rated listening effort compared with listeners with normal hearing. For listeners with hearing impairment, the rating extreme effort, which corresponds to negative SNRs, was more correlated to the speech reception threshold than the rating no effort, which corresponds to positive SNRs. A benefit of hearing aids on speech intelligibility was only verifiable at negative SNRs, whereas the effect on listening effort showed high individual differences mainly at positive SNRs. Conclusion The adaptive procedure for rating subjective listening effort yields information beyond using speech intelligibility to estimate hearing difficulties and to evaluate hearing aids.

[1]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Development and analysis of an International Speech Test Signal (ISTS) , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[2]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[3]  Erin M Picou,et al.  How Hearing Aids, Background Noise, and Visual Cues Influence Objective Listening Effort , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[4]  S. Bacon,et al.  The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[5]  Jan Rennies,et al.  Perceived listening effort and speech intelligibility in reverberation and noise for hearing-impaired listeners , 2016, International journal of audiology.

[6]  K Schorn,et al.  Temporal resolution in hard-of-hearing patients. , 1982, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[7]  Sridhar Kalluri,et al.  Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. , 2009, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[8]  Birgitta Larsby,et al.  Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[9]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  Strategy-selective noise reduction for binaural digital hearing aids , 2003, Speech Commun..

[10]  A. Zekveld,et al.  Cognitive Load During Speech Perception in Noise: The Influence of Age, Hearing Loss, and Cognition on the Pupil Response , 2011, Ear and hearing.

[11]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  An adaptive procedure for categorical loudness scaling. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Thomas Brand,et al.  Optimized loudness-function estimation for categorical loudness scaling data , 2014, Hearing Research.

[13]  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.

[14]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  I. Holube Speech intelligibility in fluctuating maskers , 2011 .

[16]  L E Humes Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[17]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Listening effort and speech intelligibility in listening situations affected by noise and reverberation. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Thomas Brand,et al.  Development of an adaptive scaling method for subjective listening effort. , 2017, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  A. Wingfield,et al.  Hearing Impairment and Cognitive Energy: The Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL) , 2016, Ear and hearing.

[20]  S. Arlinger,et al.  Speech understanding in quiet and noise, with and without hearing aids , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[21]  R. Cox,et al.  A Comparison of Two Methods for Measuring Listening Effort As Part of an Audiologic Test Battery. , 2015, American journal of audiology.

[22]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The Intelligibility of Interrupted Speech , 1948 .

[23]  A. Stewart,et al.  Listening effort and fatigue: What exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group ‘white paper’ , 2014, International journal of audiology.

[24]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA Noises: Artificial Noise Signals with Speech-like Spectral and Temporal Properties for Hearing Instrument Assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos , 2001 .

[25]  Anna Warzybok,et al.  The multilingual matrix test: Principles, applications, and comparison across languages: A review , 2015, International journal of audiology.

[26]  W. Noble,et al.  The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[27]  R Plomp,et al.  Effect of multiple speechlike maskers on binaural speech recognition in normal and impaired hearing. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  Giso Grimm,et al.  Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  J. Kessler,et al.  DemTect: a new, sensitive cognitive screening test to support the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and early dementia , 2004, International journal of geriatric psychiatry.

[30]  Astrid van Wieringen,et al.  Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests , 2011, International journal of audiology.

[31]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  The role of silent intervals for sentence intelligibility in fluctuating noise in hearing-impaired listeners , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[32]  Karolina Smeds,et al.  Estimation of Signal-to-Noise Ratios in Realistic Sound Scenarios. , 2015, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[33]  Sergei Kochkin,et al.  MarkeTrak VII: Customer satisfaction with hearing instruments in the digital age , 2005 .

[34]  B J Kwon,et al.  Consonant identification under maskers with sinusoidal modulation: masking release or modulation interference? , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  Jace Wolfe,et al.  Effects of Input Processing and Type of Personal Frequency Modulation System on Speech-Recognition Performance of Adults With Cochlear Implants , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[36]  B. Hornsby The Effects of Hearing Aid Use on Listening Effort and Mental Fatigue Associated With Sustained Speech Processing Demands , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[37]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment , 2015, International journal of audiology.

[38]  Martin Hansen,et al.  Measurement and prediction of the acceptable noise level for single-microphone noise reduction algorithms , 2012, International journal of audiology.

[39]  Brent Edwards,et al.  The Future of Hearing Aid Technology , 2007, Trends in amplification.

[40]  Yingjiu Nie,et al.  Masking release and modulation interference in cochlear implant and simulation listeners. , 2013, American journal of audiology.

[41]  Rolph Houben,et al.  Using response time to speech as a measure for listening effort , 2013, International journal of audiology.