Characterizing the binaural contribution to speech-in-noise reception in elderly hearing-impaired listeners

Neher, Tobias

doi:10.1121/1.4976327

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It would be useful in future studies to assess how well the test works for people with asymmetric losses. Neher (2017) measured BMLDs for listeners with both symmetric and asymmetric hearing loss at low frequencies and found no significant effect of asymmetry, suggesting that binaural TFS processing was still possible for the asymmetric group. If so, then we would expect the TFS-AF test also to be applicable to listeners with asymmetric hearing loss.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of a Method for Determining Binaural Sensitivity to Temporal Fine Structure (TFS-AF Test) for Older Listeners With Normal and Impaired Low-Frequency Hearing

Füllgrabe

Moore

2017

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to process binaural temporal fine structure (TFS) information was assessed using the TFS-AF test (where AF stands for adaptive frequency) for 26 listeners aged 60 years or more with normal or elevated low-frequency audiometric thresholds. The test estimates the highest frequency at which a fixed interaural phase difference (IPD) of ϕ (varied here between 30° and 180°) can be discriminated from an IPD of 0°, with higher thresholds indicating better performance. A sensation level of 30 dB was used. All listeners were able to perform the task reliably, giving thresholds well above the lowest allowed frequency of 30 Hz. The duration of a run averaged 5 min. Repeated testing of the normal-hearing listeners showed no significant practice effects. Thresholds varied markedly across listeners, but their ranking was fairly consistent across values of ϕ. Thresholds decreased (worsened) with decreasing ϕ and were lower than for a group of young listeners tested in an earlier study. There were weak to moderate, negative correlations between TFS-AF thresholds and audiometric thresholds at low frequencies (125–1000 Hz) but not at high frequencies (4000–8000 Hz). In conclusion, the TFS-AF test yielded a graded measure of binaural TFS sensitivity for all listeners. This contrasts with the TFS-LF (low-frequency) test, which measures the smallest detectable shift in IPD for a fixed frequency. The absence of practice effects and a reasonably short administration time make the TFS-AF test a good candidate for the assessment of sensitivity to changes in binaural TFS for older listeners without or with hearing loss.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Another commonly used measure of binaural TFS sensitivity is the binaural masking level difference (BMLD; e.g., Neher, 2017 ; Santurette & Dau, 2012 ). The BMLD requires two threshold measurements (e.g., N 0 S 0 and N 0 S π ), although the N 0 S π threshold alone has sometimes been used as an estimate of binaural TFS sensitivity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Method for Determining Binaural Sensitivity to Temporal Fine Structure (TFS-AF Test) for Older Listeners With Normal and Impaired Low-Frequency Hearing

Füllgrabe

Moore

2017

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was done to follow the audiometric inclusion criterion of symmetric hearing sensitivity used in most (but not all) previous studies investigating binaural TFS sensitivity. Neher (2017) reported that there were no differences in binaural TFS sensitivity between listeners with symmetric and asymmetric hearing losses at low frequencies. However, his study assessed BMLDs (and not IPD discrimination) and hence it was deemed prudent to exclude the few asymmetric cases observed in some data sets from the meta-analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Binaural TFS sensitivity has been studied using a variety of behavioral tasks, such as the binaural masking level difference (BMLD; e.g., Neher, 2017 ; Pichora-Fuller & Schneider, 1991 ; Santurette & Dau, 2012 ; Strelcyk & Dau, 2009 ), interaural time difference (ITD) discrimination (e.g., Füllgrabe & Moore, 2014 ; Strouse, Ashmead, Ohde, & Grantham, 1998 ), and IPD discrimination (e.g., Füllgrabe, Harland, Sęk, & Moore, 2017 ; Ross et al., 2007 ; Strelcyk & Dau, 2009 ). One test that has been used in several recent studies is the TFS-LF test developed by Hopkins and Moore (2010) and implemented by Sęk and Moore (2012 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association Between the Processing of Binaural Temporal-Fine-Structure Information and Audiometric Threshold and Age: A Meta-Analysis

Füllgrabe

Moore

2018

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to process binaural temporal fine structure (TFS) information, which influences the perception of speech in spatially distributed soundscapes, declines with increasing hearing loss and age. Because of the relatively small sample sizes used in previous studies, and the population-unrepresentative distribution of hearing loss and ages within study samples, it has been difficult to determine the relative and combined contributions of hearing loss and age. The aim of this study was to survey published and unpublished studies that assessed binaural TFS sensitivity using the TFS-low frequency (LF) test. Results from 19 studies were collated, yielding sample sizes of 147 to 648, depending on the test frequency. At least for the test frequency of 500 Hz, there were at least 67 listeners in each of four adult age groups and the distribution of audiometric thresholds at the test frequency within each group was similar to that for the population as a whole. Binaural TFS sensitivity declined with increasing age across the adult lifespan and with increasing hearing loss in old adulthood. For all test frequencies, both audiometric threshold and age were significantly negatively correlated with TFS-LF sensitivity (r ranging from −0.19 to −0.64) but the correlation was always significantly higher for age than for audiometric threshold. Regression analyses showed that the standardized regression coefficient was greater for age than for audiometric threshold, and that there was a significant interaction; the effect of increasing age among older listeners was greater when the hearing loss was ≥30 dB than when it was < 30 dB.

show abstract

“…Besides the binaural tests presented previously, another approach for evaluating the binaural processing abilities is assessing binaural masking release (Durlach, 1963), which has been used in several studies (Neher, 2017;Strelcyk & Dau, 2009) and implemented in some commercial audiometers (Brown & Musiek, 2013). In this paradigm, a tone-in-noise stimulus is presented in two conditions: (1) a diotic condition where the tone is in phase in the two ears, and (2) a dichotic condition where the tone is in antiphase in the two ears.…”

Section: Binaural Masking Releasementioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits in listeners with various hearing abilities: The BEAR test battery

Sanchez-Lopez

Nielsen

El-Haj-Ali

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project aims to provide a new clinical profiling tool, a test battery, for hearing loss characterization. Whereas the loss of sensitivity can be efficiently measured using pure-tone audiometry, the assessment of supra-threshold hearing deficits remains a challenge. In contrast to the classical 'attenuation-distortion' model, the proposed BEAR approach is based on the hypothesis that the hearing abilities of a given listener can be characterized along two dimensions reflecting independent types of perceptual deficits (distortions). A data-driven approach provided evidence for the existence of different auditory profiles with different degrees of distortions. Design: Eleven tests were included in a test battery, based on their clinical feasibility, time efficiency and related evidence from the literature. The tests were divided into six categories: audibility, speech perception, binaural processing abilities, loudness perception, spectro-temporal modulation sensitivity and spectro-temporal resolution. Study sample: Seventy-five listeners with symmetric, mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss were selected from a clinical population. Results: The analysis of the results showed interrelations among outcomes related to high-frequency processing and outcome measures related to low-frequency processing abilities. Conclusions: The results showed the ability of the tests to reveal differences among individuals and their potential use in clinical settings.

show abstract

Characterizing the binaural contribution to speech-in-noise reception in elderly hearing-impaired listeners

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Evaluation of a Method for Determining Binaural Sensitivity to Temporal Fine Structure (TFS-AF Test) for Older Listeners With Normal and Impaired Low-Frequency Hearing

Evaluation of a Method for Determining Binaural Sensitivity to Temporal Fine Structure (TFS-AF Test) for Older Listeners With Normal and Impaired Low-Frequency Hearing

The Association Between the Processing of Binaural Temporal-Fine-Structure Information and Audiometric Threshold and Age: A Meta-Analysis

Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits in listeners with various hearing abilities: The BEAR test battery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About