Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification
Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification
复制标题
DOI：
10.1121/1.421224
复制
发表时间：
1998-02-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Byrne, D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ching, TYC;Dillon, H;Byrne, D
研究人员进行了两项实验，以考察感觉神经性听力损失程度从轻到重的个体的听觉和语音识别能力之间的关系。使用过滤后的句子测量的语音分数与基于语音清晰度指数(SII)的预测进行了比较。SII大大高估了高感觉水平下的表现，而对于许多听众来说，它低估了低感觉水平下的表现。为了提高预测精度，需要对SII进行修改。研究发现，用乘法熟练程度系数来衡量指数是不合适的，并探讨了替代的修改办法。使用一种结合了标准水平失真系数(根据对听力正常的人的测量结果，这是高呈现水平时语音清晰度下降的原因)和个人频率相关熟练程度的方法，对数据进行了最佳拟合。使用宽频句子和无意义音节测试对该方法进行了评估。结果表明，听觉不能很好地解释许多听力受损的人的语音识别。与基于听觉的预测仍然有相当大的差异，特别是对于那些在高感觉水平下收听的严重损失的人。数据表明，与SII的基础相反，每个频段中包含的信息并不是严格意义上的相加。数据还表明，对于在高频下有严重或严重损失的人，放大应该只在这个区域达到低或零感觉水平，与未经修改的SII的含义相反。(C)1998年美国声学学会。[S0001-4966(98)05401-0]。
Two experiments were conducted to examine the relationship between audibility and speech recognition for individuals with sensorineural hearing losses ranging from mild to profound degrees. Speech scores measured using filtered sentences were compared to predictions based on the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII). The SII greatly overpredicted performance at high sensation levels, and for many listeners, it underpredicted performance at low sensation levels. To improve predictive accuracy, the SII needed to be modified. Scaling the index by a multiplicative proficiency factor was found to be inappropriate, and alternative modifications were explored. The data were best fitted using a method that combined the standard level distortion factor (which accounted for decrease in speech intelligibility at high presentation levels based on measurements of normal-hearing people) with individual frequency-dependent proficiency. This method was evaluated using broadband sentences and nonsense syllables tests. Results indicate that audibility cannot adequately explain speech recognition of many hearing-impaired listeners. Considerable variations from audibility-based predictions remained, especially for people with severe losses listening at high sensation levels. The data suggest that, contrary to the basis of the SII, information contained in each frequency band is not strictly additive. The data also suggest that for people with severe or profound losses at the high frequencies, amplification should only achieve a low or zero sensation level at this region, contrary to the implications of the unmodified SII. (C) 1998 Acoustical Society of America. [S0001-4966(98)05401-0].