Modulation Interference from Speech-Modulated Noise in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: This study examined modulation interference in sentence recognition for bimodal cochlear implant (CI) users. Methods: Thirteen bimodal users and thirteen normal-hearing (NH) listeners (reference) participated in this study. The adaptive Korean Matrix sentence-in-noise test measured the speech reception thresholds (SRTs) required for 50% speech-in-noise intelligibility. As background noise, we presented two background noises: stationary speech-shaped noise (SSN) and single-talker speech-modulated masker (International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology noise, ICRA). The amount of masking release due to fluctuations in the speech-modulated noise, called speech masking release (SMR), was calculated from the difference between SRTs with SSN and SRTs with ICRA noise. The SRTs were measured twice for bimodal CI users: CI-only and bimodal listening. Results: The mean SMR for NH listeners was approximately 12 dB. The mean SMR for bimodal CI users was about -5 dB, with either CI alone or bimodal listening. This means that bimodal CI users experienced modulation interference rather than masking release from the temporal fluctuations. We observed positive bimodal benefits, yet the interference from fluctuating maskers was similar between the CI-only and bimodal listening. The low-frequency aided hearing thresholds in the nonimplanted ear were unrelated to the amount of SMR for bimodal users. Conclusion: NH listeners could take advantage of temporal fluctuations in the speech-modulated noise. However, bimodal CI listeners hardly glimpsed target speech in the dips of the speechmodulated masker, regardless of listening mode. Bimodal listening did not significantly reduce modulation interference compared to CI-only listening.
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined modulation interference in sentence recognition for bimodal cochlear implant (CI) users. Methods: Thirteen bimodal users and thirteen normal-hearing (NH) listeners (reference) participated in this study. The adaptive Korean Matrix sentence-in-noise test measured the speech reception thresholds (SRTs) required for 50% speech-in-noise intelligibility. As background noise, we presented two background noises: stationary speech-shaped noise (SSN) and single-talker speech-modulated masker (International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology noise, ICRA). The amount of masking release due to fluctuations in the speech-modulated noise, called speech masking release (SMR), was calculated from the difference between SRTs with SSN and SRTs with ICRA noise. The SRTs were measured twice for bimodal CI users: CI-only and bimodal listening. Results: The mean SMR for NH listeners was approximately 12 dB. The mean SMR for bimodal CI users was about -5 dB, with either CI alone or bimodal listening. This means that bimodal CI users experienced modulation interference rather than masking release from the temporal fluctuations. We observed positive bimodal benefits, yet the interference from fluctuating maskers was similar between the CI-only and bimodal listening. The low-frequency aided hearing thresholds in the nonimplanted ear were unrelated to the amount of SMR for bimodal users. Conclusion: NH listeners could take advantage of temporal fluctuations in the speech-modulated noise. However, bimodal CI listeners hardly glimpsed target speech in the dips of the speechmodulated masker, regardless of listening mode. Bimodal listening did not significantly reduce modulation interference compared to CI-only listening.
참고문헌 (36)
- Bernstein, J. G., "Effects of spectral smearing and temporal fine-structure distortion on the fluctuating-masker benefit for speech at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), pp.473~488 (2011)
- Cooke, M., "A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(3), pp.1562~1573 (2006)
- Croghan, N. B., "Speech understanding with various maskers in cochlear-implant and simulated cochlearimplant hearing : Effects of spectral resolution and implications for masking release", Trends in Hearing, 22, pp.2331216518787276~ (2018)
- de Graaff, F., "Binaural summation, binaural unmasking and fluctuating masker benefit in bimodal and bilateral adult cochlear implant users", Cochlear Implants International, 22(5), pp.245~256 (2021)
- Dreschler, W. A., "ICRA noises: Artificial noise signals with speechlike spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment", International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. Audiology, 40(3), pp.148~157 (2001)
- Eisenberg, L. S., "Speech recognition in amplitude-modulated noise of listeners with normal and listeners with impaired hearing", Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 38(1), pp.222~233 (1995)
- Festen, J. M., "Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88(4), pp.1725~1736 (1990)
- Fogerty, D., "Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise : Effects of age and hearing loss", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(6), pp.3487~3501 (2015)
- Fogerty, D., "Glimpsing speech in temporally and spectro-temporally modulated noise", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143(5), pp.3047~3057 (2018)
- Francart, T., "Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests", International Journal of Audiology, 50(1), pp.2~13 (2011)
- Fu, Q. J., "Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users : The role of spectral resolution and smearing", Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 6, pp.19~27 (2005)
- Goldsworthy, R. L., "Pediatric hearing loss and speech recognition in quiet and in different types of background noise", Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(3), pp.758~767 (2019)
- Hawley, M. L., "The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party : Effect of location and type of interferer", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115(2), pp.833~843 (2004)
- Hoppe, U., "Bimodal benefit for cochlear implant listeners with different grades of hearing loss in the opposite ear", Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 138(8), pp.713~721 (2018)
- Irsik, V. C., "Age-related deficits in dip-listening evident for isolated sentences but not for spoken stories", Scientific Reports, 12(1), pp.5898~ (2022)
- Jensen, K. K., "The fluctuating masker benefit for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners with equal audibility at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 145(4), pp.2113~2125 (2019)
- Jin, S. H., "Masking release and modulation interference in cochlear implant and simulation listeners", American Journal of Audiology, 22(1), pp.135~146 (2013)
- Jung, J., "Benefits from spatial separation and fluctuating masker on sentence-in-noise recognition in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners", Audiology and Speech Research, 19(2), pp.104~115 (2023)
- Jung, Y., "Test-retest reliability of the Korean matrix sentence-in-noise recognition in sound-field testing condition", Audiology and Speech Research, 17(4), pp.344~351 (2021)
- Jung, Y., "Reliability and validity of the Korean matrix sentence-in-noise recognition test for older listeners with normal hearing and with hearing impairment", Audiology and Speech Research, 18(4), pp.213~221 (2022)
- Kim, K. H., "Evaluation of the Korean matrix sentence test : Verification of the list equivalence and the effect of word position", Audiology and Speech Research, 14(2), pp.100~107 (2018)
- Kong, Y. Y., "Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 117(3), pp.1351~1361 (2005)
- Kwon, B. J., "Sentence recognition in noise promoting or suppressing masking release by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(4), pp.3111~3119 (2012)
- Li, N., "Factors influencing glimpsing of speech in noise", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122(2), pp.1165~1172 (2007)
- Liu, Y. W., "Factors affecting bimodal benefit in pediatric Mandarinspeaking Chinese cochlear implant users", Ear and Hearing, 40(6), pp.1316~1327 (2019)
- Moon, S. K., "The Korean hearing in noise test", International Journal of Audiology, 47(6), pp.375~376 (2008)
- Morera, C., "Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid : A 6-month comparative study", Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 125(6), pp.596~606 (2005)
- Nelson, P. B., "Factors affecting speech understanding in gated interference : Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115(5), pp.2286~2294 (2004)
- Nelson, P. B., "Understanding speech in modulated interference : Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113(2), pp.961~968 (2003)
- Neuman, A. C., "Self-reported usage, functional benefit, and audiologic characteristics of cochlear implant patients who use a contralateral hearing aid", Trends in Hearing, 21, pp.2331216517699530~ (2017)
- Potts, L. G., "Recognition and localization of speech by adult cochlear implant recipients wearing a digital hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear(bimodal hearing)", Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 20(6), pp.353~373 (2009)
- Stickney, G. S., "Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers", The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(2), pp.1081~1091 (2004)
- Stronks, H. C., "The temporal fine structure of background noise determines the benefit of bimodal hearing for recognizing speech", Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 21(6), pp.527~544 (2020)
- Summers, V., "Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: Effects of hearing loss and presentation level", Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(2), pp.245~256 (2004)
- Wang, X., "Speech perception in noise : Masking and unmasking", Journal of Otology, 16(2), pp.109~119 (2021)
- Zirn, S., "The effect of fluctuating maskers on speech understanding of high-performing cochlear implant users", International Journal of Audiology, 55(5), pp.295~304 (2016)