4.5 Article

Modelling binaural unmasking and the intelligibility of speech in noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 150, Issue 5, Pages 3275-3287

Publisher

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/10.0006736

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fondation pour l'Audition (Speech2Ears grant)
  2. Macquarie University (international research excellence scholarship, iMQRES)
  3. Labex CeLyA [ANR-10-LABX-0060]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that normal-hearing listeners benefited more from binaural unmasking compared to those with mild hearing impairment. The binaural intelligibility model was used to accurately predict data under certain noise levels.
This study investigated the effect of hearing loss on binaural unmasking (BU) for the intelligibility of speech in noise. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured with normal-hearing (NH) listeners and older mildly hearing-impaired (HI) listeners while varying the presentation level of the stimuli, reverberation, modulation of the noise masker, and spatial separation of the speech and noise sources. On average across conditions, the NH listeners benefited more (by 0.6 dB) from BU than HI listeners. The binaural intelligibility model developed by Vicente, Lavandier, and Buchholz [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 148, 3305-3317 (2020)] was used to describe the data, accurate predictions were obtained for the conditions considering moderate noise levels [50 and 60 dB sound pressure level (SPL)]. The interaural jitters that were involved in the prediction of BU had to be revised to describe the data measured at a lower level (40 dB SPL). Across all tested conditions, the correlation between the measured and predicted SRTs was 0.92, whereas the mean prediction error was 0.9 dB.& nbsp; (C) 2021 Acoustical Society of America.

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