期刊
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY
卷 51, 期 -, 页码 S20-S30出版社
INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2011.631591
关键词
Hearing protection-enhancement device; electronic hearing protector; level dependent hearing protector; sound localization; impulse noise localization; localization in noise; firearm noise; gunshot; sniper; auditory localization; azimuth
资金
- Etymotic Research, Inc.
- Department of Defense SMART
Objective: A controlled field experiment was conducted to evaluate localization of suprathreshold gunshot reports (from blank cartridges) with four hearing protection-enhancement devices (HPEDs) in comparison to the open ear with ambient outdoor noise and in 82 dBA diesel military heavy truck noise. Design: Five measures of localization accuracy and response time for eight shooter positions in azimuth were measured. Study sample: Nine normal-hearing and four impaired-hearing participants were tested. Results: Statistical analysis showed worse accuracy and response time performance with the electronic earmuffs (Peltor Com-Tac II (TM) in full gain position) than with the other tested HPEDs (Etymotic EB 1 and EB 15 High-Fidelity Electronic BlastPLG (TM) electronic earplugs, both set to Lo gain positions; and 3M Single-Ended Combat Arms (TM) passive earplug in level-dependent, open position). Performance with all HPEDs was worse than that with the open ear, except on right-left confusions, in which the earmuff stood alone as worst, and in response time, for which the EB 1 was equivalent to the open ear. There was no significant main effect of noise on performance. Hearing impairment increased right-left confusions. Subjective ratings related to localization generally corroborated objective localization performance. Conclusions: None of the tested HPEDs preserved normal localization performance.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据