Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss

Evelyn Davies-Venn, Pamela Souza, Marc A Brennan, G. Christopher Stecker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns. Design: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level (Scollie et al., 2005) and NAL-NL (Dillon, 1999). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns. Results: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss. Conclusions: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)494-504
Number of pages11
JournalEar and hearing
Volume30
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2009

Fingerprint

Hearing Loss
Confusion
Hearing Aids
Sensorineural Hearing Loss

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss. / Davies-Venn, Evelyn; Souza, Pamela; Brennan, Marc A; Stecker, G. Christopher.

In: Ear and hearing, Vol. 30, No. 5, 01.10.2009, p. 494-504.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ff62d2e6ded84b43ad467203704af6f7,
title = "Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss",
abstract = "Objective: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns. Design: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level (Scollie et al., 2005) and NAL-NL (Dillon, 1999). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns. Results: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss. Conclusions: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.",
author = "Evelyn Davies-Venn and Pamela Souza and Brennan, {Marc A} and Stecker, {G. Christopher}",
year = "2009",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181aec5bc",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "494--504",
journal = "Ear and Hearing",
issn = "0196-0202",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss

AU - Davies-Venn, Evelyn

AU - Souza, Pamela

AU - Brennan, Marc A

AU - Stecker, G. Christopher

PY - 2009/10/1

Y1 - 2009/10/1

N2 - Objective: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns. Design: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level (Scollie et al., 2005) and NAL-NL (Dillon, 1999). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns. Results: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss. Conclusions: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.

AB - Objective: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns. Design: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level (Scollie et al., 2005) and NAL-NL (Dillon, 1999). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns. Results: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss. Conclusions: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349106883&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349106883&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181aec5bc

DO - 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181aec5bc

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 494

EP - 504

JO - Ear and Hearing

JF - Ear and Hearing

SN - 0196-0202

IS - 5

ER -