Error Patterns Analysis of Hearing Aid and Cochlear ImplantUsers as a Function of Noise
2
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background and Objectives: Not all impaired listeners may have the same speech perception ability although they will have similar pure-tone threshold and configuration. For this reason, the present study analyzes error patterns in the hearing-impaired compared to normal hearing (NH) listeners as a function of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Subjects and Methods: Forty-four adults participated: 10 listeners with NH, 20 hearing aids (HA) users and 14 cochlear implants (CI) users. The Korean standardized monosyllables were presented as the stimuli in quiet and three different SNRs. Total error patterns were classified into types of substitution, omission, addition, fail, and no response, using stacked bar plots. Results: Total error percent for the three groups significantly increased as the SNRs decreased. For error pattern analysis, the NH group showed substitution errors dominantly regardless of the SNRs compared to the other groups. Both the HA and CI groups had substitution errors that declined, while no response errors appeared as the SNRs increased. The CI group was characterized by lower substitution and higher fail errors than did the HA group. Substitutions of initial and final phonemes in the HA and CI groups were limited by place of articulation errors. However, the HA group had missed consonant place cues, such as formant transitions and stop consonant bursts, whereas the CI group usually had limited confusions of nasal consonants with low frequency characteristics. Interestingly, all three groups showed /k/ addition in the final phoneme, a trend that magnified as noise increased. Conclusions: The HA and CI groups had their unique error patterns even though the aided thresholds of the two groups were similar. We expect that the results of this study will focus on high error patterns in auditory training of hearing-impaired listeners, resulting in reducing those errors and improving their speech perception ability.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Not all impaired listeners may have the same speech perception ability although they will have similar pure-tone threshold and configuration. For this reason, the present study analyzes error patterns in the hearing-impaired compared to normal hearing (NH) listeners as a function of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Subjects and Methods: Forty-four adults participated: 10 listeners with NH, 20 hearing aids (HA) users and 14 cochlear implants (CI) users. The Korean standardized monosyllables were presented as the stimuli in quiet and three different SNRs. Total error patterns were classified into types of substitution, omission, addition, fail, and no response, using stacked bar plots. Results: Total error percent for the three groups significantly increased as the SNRs decreased. For error pattern analysis, the NH group showed substitution errors dominantly regardless of the SNRs compared to the other groups. Both the HA and CI groups had substitution errors that declined, while no response errors appeared as the SNRs increased. The CI group was characterized by lower substitution and higher fail errors than did the HA group. Substitutions of initial and final phonemes in the HA and CI groups were limited by place of articulation errors. However, the HA group had missed consonant place cues, such as formant transitions and stop consonant bursts, whereas the CI group usually had limited confusions of nasal consonants with low frequency characteristics. Interestingly, all three groups showed /k/ addition in the final phoneme, a trend that magnified as noise increased. Conclusions: The HA and CI groups had their unique error patterns even though the aided thresholds of the two groups were similar. We expect that the results of this study will focus on high error patterns in auditory training of hearing-impaired listeners, resulting in reducing those errors and improving their speech perception ability.
참고문헌 (27)
- Mendel LL, "Audiologic evaluation and management and speech perception assessment" (1997), Singular Pub Group
- McArdle R, "Handbook of Clinical Audiology", pp.64~79 (2009), Lippincott, Williams & Wilkin
- Kalikow DN, "Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability", J Acoust Soc Am, 61, pp.1337~1351 (1977)
- Nilsson M, "Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise", J Acoust Soc Am, 95, pp.1085~1099 (1994)
- Killion MC, "Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-tonoise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners", J Acoust Soc Am, 116(4 Pt 1), pp.2395~2405 (2004)
- 한우재, "A Relationship of Speech Perception and Amplification for Hearing-Impaired Listeners", Audiology and Speech Research, 7(2), pp.133~144 (2011), 한국청각언어재활학회
- 한우재, "A Relationship of Tone, Consonant, and Speech Perception in Audiological Diagnosis", 한국음향학회지, 31(5), pp.298~308 (2012), 한국음향학회[DOI]
- 한우재, "Speech Perception Test of Zero-Error Consonant-Vowel Syllables in Presbycusis", Audiology and Speech Research, 8(2), pp.183~189 (2012), 한국청각언어재활학회
- 노복임, "경사형 및 수평형 난청유형에 따른 단음절 인지에 관한 비교연구", Audiology and Speech Research, 8(1), pp.78~86 (2012), 한국청각언어재활학회
- Baddeley A, "Working Memory", Science, 255, pp.556~559 (1992)
- Walden BE, "Dimensions of consonant perception in normal and hearing-impaired listeners", J Speech Hear Res, 18, pp.444~455 (1975)
- Danhauer JL, "Perceptual features from normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children’s errors on the NST", Ear Hear, 7, pp.318~322 (1986)
- Donaldson GS, "Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users", Ear Hear, 27, pp.658~677 (2006)
- Gordon-Salant S, "Consonant recognition and confusion patterns among elderly hearing-impaired subjects", Ear Hear, 8, pp.270~276 (1987)
- Kim JS, "Development of Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists", Audiology, 4, pp.126~140 (2008)
- Allen JB, "Speech Perception and Hearing Loss", Volta Rev, 112, pp.156~166 (2012)
- Dobie RA, "Noise-Induced Hearing Loss: basic mechanisms, prevention, and control", pp.351~363 (2001), NRN Publishers
- Bentler RA, "Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. II: Subjective measures", J Speech Hear Res, 36, pp.820~831 (1993)
- 이재희, "인공와우 및 보청기 착용자의 단음절, 환경음 인지도와 오류패턴 비교", Audiology and Speech Research, 7(1), pp.28~39 (2011), 한국청각언어재활학회
- Stelmachowicz PG, "Aided perception of", s, z, pp.by hearing-impaired children, Ear Hear[DOI]
- Freyman RL, "Consonant confusions in amplitudeexpanded speech", J Speech Hear Res, 39, pp.1124~1137 (1996)
- Noh H, "Acoustic analyses of monosyllabic words which are difficult to discriminate in the high frequency hearing loss", Korean J Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg, 44, pp.700~706 (2001)
- Kim SJ, "Articulatory and phonological disorders" (2007), Sigma Press
- Greenberg S, "Principles of experimental phonetics", pp.399~ (1996), Mosby Year Book
- Summerfield Q, "Lipreading and audio-visual speech perception", Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci, 335, pp.71~78 (1992)
- 김동창, "한국자음지각검사의 오류특성 및 유용성 분석", 재활복지, 18(4), pp.295~314 (2014), 한국장애인재활협회[DOI]
- Gow DW Jr, "Lexical influences on speech perception: a Granger causality analysis of MEG and EEG source estimates", Neuroimage, 43, pp.614~623 (2008)