1982
DOI: 10.3109/00206098209072747
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differences in Speech Discrimination in the Elderly as a Function of Type of Competing Noise: Speech-Babble or Cafeteria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1985
1985
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, amplitude modulations or fluctuations (Gustafsson and Arlinger, 1994); energy allocation in the frequency spectrum of noise (Kaplan and Pickett, 1982;Prosser et al, 1991); and the existence of linguistic information in background noise (Bacon et al, 1998) may have differential effects on speech intelligibility. However, comparison of results is somewhat difficult because these studies differed in the types of background noise, scoring method, and test materials used; syllables, words, and sentences that differ in the amount of contextual cues were used across studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, amplitude modulations or fluctuations (Gustafsson and Arlinger, 1994); energy allocation in the frequency spectrum of noise (Kaplan and Pickett, 1982;Prosser et al, 1991); and the existence of linguistic information in background noise (Bacon et al, 1998) may have differential effects on speech intelligibility. However, comparison of results is somewhat difficult because these studies differed in the types of background noise, scoring method, and test materials used; syllables, words, and sentences that differ in the amount of contextual cues were used across studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At moderate suprathreshold levels, binaural loudness summation results in a loudness increase equivalent to about 6 dB greater than the monaural signal (e.g., Epstein & Florentine, 2009; Gigerenzer & Strube, 1983; Irwin, 1965; Moore & Glasberg, 2007; Zwicker & Zwicker, 1991). The increase in the overall loudness of the binaural signals results in approximately a 5% increase in binaural SI; however, this value depends to some degree on the listening conditions and base monaural intelligibility (Davis, Haggard, & Bell, 1990; Harris, 1965; Kaplan & Pickett, 1982).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most people notice little decline in hearing ability before 45 or 50; however, with each passing decade, 112 Journal of the International Listening Association a greater loss in hearing sensitivity occurs. When distinguishing the phonemes of the language becomes difficult, spoken words become blurred, especially under listening conditions with reverberation, simultaneous conversation, or environmental noise (Kaplin & Pickett, 1982;Nabelek & Robinson, 1982). Ultimately then, the inability of a presbycusic individual to distinguish phonemes leads to greater difficulty in apprehending the content of spoken communication.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%