Speech Perception in Noise: The Basics

Abstract

No AccessPerspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders: Research and DiagnosticsArticle1 Feb 2009Speech Perception in Noise: The Basics Rachel McArdle, and Richard H. Wilson Rachel McArdle Bay Pines VA Healthcare SystemBay Pines, FL Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South FloridaTampa, FL Google Scholar More articles by this author and Richard H. Wilson James H. Quillen VA Medical CenterMountain Home, TN Departments of Surgery and Communicative Disorders, East Tennessee State UniversityJohnson City, TN Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/hhd13.1.4 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Abstract One of the most common complaints expressed by individuals with hearing loss is difficulty understanding speech when listening in background noise. This review paper highlights the importance of measuring speech recognition in noise and provides a guide to the basics of speech-in-noise testing. Topics included in this review paper along with relevant research findings are (a) discussion regarding the two components of hearing loss and their relation to understanding speech, (b) speech-recognition performance in quiet and in background noise, and (c) speech-in-noise testing methodology to include type of paradigm, type of noise, and type of stimulus. References Bilger, R. C., Nuetzel, R. M., Rabinowitz, W. J., & Rzeczkowski, C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27, 32–48. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Carhart, R. (1951). Basic principles of speech audiometry.Acta Otolaryngologica, 40, 62–71. Google Scholar Carhart, R., & Tillman, T. W. (1970). Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses.Archives of Otolaryngology, 91, 273–279. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., & Gilmore, C. (1987). Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST).Ear and Hearing, 8, 119S–125S. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Department of Veterans Affairs. (1998). Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment Disc 2.0. Mountain Home, TN: VA Medical Center. Google Scholar Dirks, D., Wilson, R. H., & Bower, D. (1969). Effect of pulsed masking on selected speech materials.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46(4), 898–906. Google Scholar Etymoōtic Research. (2005). BKB-SIN™ Speech-in-Noise Test version 1.03 (Compact Disc) 61 Martin Lane, Elk Grove Village, IL 60007. Google Scholar Finney, D. J. (1952). Statistical Methods in Biological Assay. London: Griffin. Google Scholar Killion, M. C. (2002). New thinking on hearing in noise: A generalized Articulation Index.Seminars in Hearing, 23, 57–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Killion, M. C., Niquette, P. A., Gudmundsen, G. I., Revit, L. J., & Banerjee, S. (2004). Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 2395–2405. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar McArdle, R. A., Wilson, R. H., & Burks, C. A. (2005). Speech recognition in multitalker babble using digits, words, and sentences.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 16, 726–739. Google Scholar McArdle, R. A., & Wilson, R. H. (2006). Homogeneity of the 18 QuickSIN™ lists.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 17, 157–167. Google Scholar Miller, G.A., Heise, G. A., & Lichten, W. (1951). The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41(5), 329–335. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Nilsson, M., Soli, S., & Sullivan, J. (1994). Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 1085–1099. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Niquette, P., Arcaroli, J., Revit, L., Parkinson, A., Staller, S., Skinner, M., & Killion, M. ( 2003, March). Development of the BKB-SIN Test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Auditory Society, Scottsdale. http://www.amauditorysoc.org/pages/abstracts/2003/2003-pp-1.html Google Scholar Plomp, R. (1978). Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 63, 533–549. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Stephens, S. D. G. (1976). The input for a damaged cochlea-A brief review.British Journal of Audiology, 10, 97–101. Google Scholar Tillman, T. W., & Carhart, R. (1966). An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words. (Tech. Rep. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6). Texas: Brooks Air Force Base, USAF School of Aerospace Medicine. Google Scholar Wilson, R. H. (2003). Development of a speech in multitalker babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 14, 453–470. MedlineGoogle Scholar Wilson, R. H., & Burks, C. A. (2005). The use of 35 words to evaluate hearing loss in terms of signal-to-babble ratio: A clinic protocol.Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 42, 839–852. Google Scholar Wilson, R. H., & Carhart, R. (1971) Forward and backward masking: interactions and additivity.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49, 1254. Google Scholar Wilson, R. H., Carnell, C., & Cleghorn, A. L. (2007). The Words-in-Noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18, 522–530. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Wilson, R. H., & McArdle, R. (2005). Speech signals used to evaluate functional status of the auditory system.Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 42, 79–94. Google Scholar Wilson, R. H., & McArdle, R. (2007). Intra- and Inter-Session Test, Retest Reliability of the Words-in-Noise (WIN) Test.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18, 813–825. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Wilson, R. H., McArdle, R., & Smith, S. L. (2007). An evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss.Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 50, 844–856. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byPerspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups6:5 (1085-1096)20 Oct 2021The Relationship Between Self-Perceived Hearing Ability and Binaural Speech-in-Noise Performance in Adults With Normal Pure-Tone HearingChristina M. Roup, Amy Custer and Julie PowellJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research63:8 (2789-2800)10 Aug 2020The Impact of Speech Recognition Testing on State Anxiety in Young, Middle-Age, and Older AdultsChristina M. Roup, Donna E. Green and J. Riley DeBackerPerspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups1:6 (55-64)31 Mar 2016The Impact of Minimal to Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss in AdultsChristina M. Roup Volume 13Issue 1February 2009Pages: 4-13 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in issue: Feb 1, 2009 Metrics Topicsasha-topicsasha-sigsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2009 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF downloadLoading ...