Comparisons of Speech Recognition in Noise by Mildly-to-Moderately Hearing-Impaired Children Using Hearing Aids and FM Systems

Hawkins, David B.

doi:10.1044/jshd.4904.409

Cited by 118 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These data reveal that the average listener fit with directional hearing aids in these difficult listening environments receives approximately 3 to 4 dB of directional benefit as measured by a variable SNR test, and 20% to 35% as measured using a fixed SNR. In addition to these data, significant directional benefit has also been reported in children4 (Gravel et al, 1999;Hawkins, 1984;Kuk et al, 1999). While it certainly appears that there is a significant advantage for directional hearing aids over their omnidirectional counterparts when listening in noise, it is important for us to consider fitting factors that may impact the magnitude of directional benefit.…”

Section: Fitting Factors Impacting Directionalmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…One technique places the microphone close to the sound source of interest. Without a doubt this method, exemplified by frequency modulated (FM) systems, provides the most SNR improvement (as much as 16 to 20 dB in noisy environments- Hawkins, 1984). While FM systems are the best option for SNR improvement in many environments, there are some potential drawbacks including concerns related to ease of portability, cosmetics, and reduced or absent overhearing abilities (Flexer, 1996;Lewis, 1991;Ricketts and Dittberner, 2002).…”

Section: Improving Snr Through Amplification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Directional Hearing Aids

Ricketts

2001

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When asking individuals with hearing impairment to identify the situations for which the most communication difficulty is encountered, listening in nioise seems to be nearly universally mentioned. In fact, I would venture that if queried, almost no patient would refuse the offer of improved levels for sounds of interest in relation to the level of background noise. Improving the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for listeners with al, 1982;Groen, 1969;Killion, 1997;Plomp, 1976;Schum, 1996;Sutter, 1985). Children with hearing impairment appear to be even more negatively effected by poor SNR (Boothroyd et al., 1996;Crandell, 1993;Crandell and Smaldino, 2000;Finitzo-Hieber and Tillman, 1978), leading the American Speech-Language-Hearing-Association (Bess et al., 1996), and others (Berg, 1993;Bistafa and Bradley, 2000;Blair, 1990;Smaldino and Crandell, 1995), to recommend SNRs of at least +15 to +30 dB in educational settings. Unfortunately, most classrooms have SNRs between -6 and + 6 dB, making learning in such environments difficult (Bess et al., 1984;Crandell and Smaldino, 2000).Results from past investigations offer clear evidence that listening in poor SNRs is a significant problem for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Listening problems in noisy environments can be devastating, and lead some listeners with hearing loss to avoid difficult listening situations, resulting in withdrawal and greater isolation, potentially impacting their overall quality of life in a negative way (Jackson, 1997;McCay, 1996;Mulrow et al., 1990). Hearing aids represent a common rehabilitation method for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Hearing aids using standard (omnidirectional) microphones, while effective at increasing audibility for speech and other sounds, are largely ineffective in improving inadequate SNR conditions whether they use analog (Killion and

show abstract

Section: Fitting Factors Impacting Directionalmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Improving Snr Through Amplification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Directional Hearing Aids

Ricketts

2001

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[39][40][41][42][43] However, most of those studies included subjects with greater degrees of hearing loss than those who are the focus of this review. For example, more favorable signal-to-noise ratios are required for equivalent performance on speechperception tasks for individuals with mild to moderate hearing loss than for those who have normal hearing.…”

Section: Speech Language and Auditory Characteristics Of Children Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unilateral and Mild Bilateral Hearing Loss in Children: Past and Current Perspectives

Tharpe

2008

Trends in Amplification

161

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the early 1980s, audiologists have become increasingly aware of the potential effect of even mild degrees of hearing loss on the psychoeducational and psychosocial outcomes of children. This review describes some of the key research findings during the past several decades that have led us to our current thinking about unilateral and mild bilateral hearing loss in children. The first section addresses unilateral hearing loss. This is followed by a review of the literature on mild bilateral hearing loss. Specifically, the issues addressed include the significance of permanent mild degrees of hearing loss on children's psychoeducational and psychosocial development and the speech, language, and auditory characteristics of children with mild degrees of hearing loss. Finally, some recommendations regarding the direction of future research are offered. This review is followed by 2 articles summarizing the proceedings of a 2005 workshop convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) program, and the Marion Downs Hearing Center to address concerns about the underidentification of—and professionals' apparent lack of awareness of—permanent unilateral and minimal to mild hearing loss in children. 56,57

show abstract

“…Personal FM systems consist of a portable microphone that is placed near the person who is speaking, and an FM receiver worn by the hearingimpaired individual [10]. The microphone broadcasts a signal on a special frequency, which is picked up by the receiver.…”

Section: Background Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

The Attentive Hearing Aid: Eye Selection of Auditory Sources for Hearing Impaired Users

Hart

Onceanu

Sohn

et al. 2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. An often-heard complaint about hearing aids is that their amplification of environmental noise makes it difficult for users to focus on one particular speaker. In this paper, we present a new prototype Attentive Hearing Aid (AHA) based on ViewPointer, a wearable calibration-free eye tracker. With AHA, users need only look at the person they are listening to, to amplify that voice in their hearing aid. We present a preliminary evaluation of the use of eye input by hearing impaired users for switching between simultaneous speakers. We compared eye input with manual source selection through pointing and remote control buttons. Results show eye input was 73% faster than selection by pointing and 58% faster than button selection. In terms of recall of the material presented, eye input performed 80% better than traditional hearing aids, 54% better than buttons, and 37% better than pointing. Participants rated eye input as highest in the "easiest", "most natural", and "best overall" categories.

show abstract

Comparisons of Speech Recognition in Noise by Mildly-to-Moderately Hearing-Impaired Children Using Hearing Aids and FM Systems

Cited by 118 publications

References 0 publications

Directional Hearing Aids

Directional Hearing Aids

Unilateral and Mild Bilateral Hearing Loss in Children: Past and Current Perspectives

The Attentive Hearing Aid: Eye Selection of Auditory Sources for Hearing Impaired Users

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About