4.5 Article

The effects of hearing loss and age on the benefit of spatial separation between multiple talkers in reverberant rooms

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 124, Issue 5, Pages 3064-3075

Publisher

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.2980441

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) [DC004545, DC00100, DC0F31, DC00844004663]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the interaction between hearing loss, reverberation, and age on the benefit of spatially separating multiple masking talkers from a target talker. Four listener groups were tested based on hearing status and age. On every trial listeners heard three different sentences spoken simultaneously by different female talkers. Listeners reported keywords from the target sentence, which was presented at a fixed and known location. Maskers were colocated with the target or presented from spatially separated and symmetrically placed loudspeakers, creating a situation with no simple better-ear. Reverberation was also varied. The target-to-masker ratio at threshold for identification of the fixed-level target was measured by adapting the level of the maskers. On average, listeners with hearing loss showed less spatial release from masking than normal-hearing listeners. Age was a significant factor although small differences in hearing sensitivity across age groups may have contributed to this effect. Spatial release was reduced in the more reverberant room condition but in most cases a significant advantage remained. These results provide evidence for a large benefit of spatial separation in a multitalker situation that is likely due to perceptual factors. However, this benefit is significantly reduced by both hearing loss and reverberation. (C) 2008 Acoustical Society of America. [DOI: 10.1121/1.2980441]

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available