Measures of auditory-visual integration in nonsense syllables and sentences
Measures of auditory-visual integration in nonsense syllables and sentences
复制标题
DOI：
10.1121/1.423751
复制
发表时间：
1998-10-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Seitz, PF
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Grant, KW;Seitz, PF
对于除最严重听力受损(HI)的人以外的所有人，听觉-视觉(AV)语音一直被证明比听觉(A)或视觉(V)语音能够提供更准确的识别。然而，在不同的HI患者中，获得的AV受益量(即，AV性能相对于单峰性能的优势)可能有很大的不同。要开始解释这些个体差异，需要考虑几个因素。其中最明显的是A和V语音识别技能的不足。然而，即使考虑到单峰技能水平，个体的AV识别分数之间的巨大差异仍然存在。这些剩余的差异可能归因于整合A和V语音信息的感知过程的不同操作效率。目前还没有公认的标准来衡量假定的一体化进程。在这项研究中，比较了几种可能的整合措施，使用相同和不同的AV无意义音节和句子识别任务。对噪声中无意义的音节和句子的整合措施之间以及各整合措施与独立的AV效益指标之间的相关性进行了检验。使用无意义音节测试得出的整合测量结果之间存在显著的相关性；在这些测量上，HI受试者总体上表现出较高的整合能力水平。句子再认测试的整合测验与无意义音节测验的整合测验之间也存在显著相关，但与无意义音节测验的整合测验没有显著相关。同样，基于无意义音节识别测试的AV收益测量与基于涉及句子材料的测试的收益测量没有显著的相关性。最后，来自同一类语料的声学整合与效益指标之间存在显著的相关关系，而来自不同类别的语料的整合与效益指标之间的相关不显著。这些结果表明，在无意义音节和句子输入上，AV优势和A、V语音信息整合的知觉过程可能不同。[S0001-4966(98)03510-3]。
For all but the most profoundly hearing-impaired (HI) individuals, auditory-visual (AV) speech has been shown consistently to afford more accurate recognition than auditory (A) or visual (V) speech. However, the amount of AV benefit achieved (i.e., the superiority of AV performance in relation to unimodal performance) can differ widely across HI individuals. To begin to explain these individual differences, several factors need to be considered. The most obvious of these are deficient A and V speech recognition skills. However, large differences in individuals' AV recognition scores persist even when unimodal skill levels are taken into account. These remaining differences might be attributable to differing efficiency in the operation of a perceptual process that integrates A and V speech information. There is at present no accepted measure of the putative integration process. In this study, several possible integration measures are compared using both congruent and discrepant AV nonsense syllable and sentence recognition tasks. Correlations were tested among the integration measures, and between each integration measure and independent measures of AV benefit for nonsense syllables and sentences in noise. Integration measures derived from tests using nonsense syllables were significantly correlated with each other; on these measures, HI subjects show generally high levels of integration ability. Integration measures derived from sentence recognition tests were also significantly correlated with each other, but were not significantly correlated with the measures derived from nonsense syllable tests. Similarly, the measures of AV benefit based on nonsense syllable recognition tests were found not to be significantly correlated with the benefit measures based on tests involving sentence materials. Finally, there were significant correlations between AV integration and benefit measures derived from the same class of speech materials, but nonsignificant correlations between integration and benefit measures derived from different classes of materials. These results suggest that the perceptual processes underlying AV benefit and the integration of A and V speech information might not operate in the same way on nonsense syllable and sentence input. [S0001-4966(98)03510-3].