title: The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080, USA.
authors.forename: Rithika
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Saripella
authors.forename: Philipos C
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: Loizou
authors.forename: Linda
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Thibodeau
authors.forename: Jennifer A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Alford
mesh_terms: D000161:Acoustic Stimulation; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001309:Auditory Threshold; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D012048:Correction of Hearing Impairment; D003463:Cues; D006310:Hearing Aids; D006319:Hearing Loss, Sensorineural / Q000523:psychology* / Q000534:rehabilitation; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D009622:Noise / Q000009:adverse effects*; D010470:Perceptual Masking; D019986:Persons with Hearing Disabilities / Q000523:psychology* / Q000534:rehabilitation; D021641:Recognition, Psychology; D012815:Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted; D013018:Sound Spectrography; D013061:Speech Acoustics; D013065:Speech Intelligibility; D013067:Speech Perception; D013069:Speech Reception Threshold Test; D013997:Time Factors
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1987 May;81(5):1566-73
references.pmid: 3584694
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1980 Jan;67(1):306-17
references.pmid: 7354198
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1982 Aug;32(2):141-52
references.pmid: 7145584
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Dec;124(6):3947
references.pmid: 19206819
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Dec;118(6):3874-88
references.pmid: 16419830
references.citation: Trends Amplif. 2001 Mar;5(1):1-34
references.pmid: 25425895
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1972 Jun;15(2):308-22
references.pmid: 5047869
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2007 Oct;122(4):2365-75
references.pmid: 17902871
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1989 Sep;32(3):524-35
references.pmid: 2779197
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1968 Sep;11(3):648-55
references.pmid: 5722492
references.citation: Am J Audiol. 1999 Jun;8(1):47-56
references.pmid: 10499119
references.citation: J Am Acad Audiol. 2001 Jan;12(1):37-51
references.pmid: 11214977
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1998 Feb;103(2):1128-40
references.pmid: 9479766
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1988 Sep;31(3):386-93
references.pmid: 3172755
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1985 Sep;28(3):455-62
references.pmid: 4046587
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2002 Apr;111(4):1872-91
references.pmid: 12002871
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1985 Dec;78(6):1949-57
references.pmid: 4078171
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Apr;34(2):415-26
references.pmid: 2046366
references.citation: Trends Amplif. 2006 Jun;10(2):67-82
references.pmid: 16959731
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Feb;97(2):1206-23
references.pmid: 7876443
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1986 Dec;80(6):1599-607
references.pmid: 3794065
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2007 Aug;122(2):1165-72
references.pmid: 17672662
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1999 Apr;105(4):2431-44
references.pmid: 10212424
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1987 Apr;81(4):1199-202
references.pmid: 3571732
references.citation: Int J Audiol. 2008 Aug;47(8):447-60
references.pmid: 18698521
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1993 Jun;36(3):609-20
references.pmid: 8331917
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1998 Jul;104(1):432-41
references.pmid: 9670535
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Sep;128(3):1262-71
references.pmid: 20815461