Tonal Language Speakers Are Better Able to Segregate Competing Speech According to Talker Sex Differences

Zhang, Juan; Wang, Xing; Wang, Ningyu; Fu, Xin; Gan, Tian; Galvin, John J.; Willis, Shelby; Xu, Kai; Thomas, Mathew; Fu, Qiuyun

doi:10.1044/2020_jslhr-19-00421

Cited by 10 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean SRTs for all maskers were lower (better) for the NH group than for the CI group, and values were comparable to those in previous studies using similar methods and stimuli (Tao et al, 2018;Zhang et al, 2020). Different from previous CI studies that showed lower SRTs in SSN than in competing speech (e.g., Cullington and Zeng, 2008;Croghan and Smith, 2018;Tao et al, 2018;Liu et al, 2019), there was no significant difference in SRTs between the SSN and competing speech maskers within the CI group.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

The P300 Auditory Event-Related Potential May Predict Segregation of Competing Speech by Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared to normal-hearing (NH) listeners, cochlear implant (CI) listeners have greater difficulty segregating competing speech. Neurophysiological studies have largely investigated the neural foundations for CI listeners' speech recognition in quiet, mainly using the P300 component of event-related potentials (ERPs). P300 is closely related to cognitive processes involving auditory discrimination, selective attention, and working memory. Different from speech perception in quiet, little is known about the neurophysiological foundations for segregation of competing speech by CI listeners. In this study, ERPs were measured for a 1 vs. 2 kHz contrast in 11 Mandarin-speaking bimodal CI listeners and 11 NH listeners. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for a male target talker were measured in steady noise or with a male or female masker. Results showed that P300 amplitudes were significantly larger and latencies were significantly shorter for the NH than for the CI group. Similarly, SRTs were significantly better for the NH than for the CI group. Across all participants, P300 amplitude was significantly correlated with SRTs in steady noise (r = −0.65, p = 0.001) and with the competing male (r = −0.62, p = 0.002) and female maskers (r = −0.60, p = 0.003). Within the CI group, there was a significant correlation between P300 amplitude and SRTs with the male masker (r = −0.78, p = 0.005), which produced the most informational masking. The results suggest that P300 amplitude may be a clinically useful neural correlate of central auditory processing capabilities (e.g., susceptibility to informational masking) in bimodal CI patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

The P300 Auditory Event-Related Potential May Predict Segregation of Competing Speech by Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The mean MR with spatial cues for the present Mandarin-speaking NH listeners (14.9) was somewhat higher than reported for English-speaking listeners under similar spatial conditions (i.e., target from the front and two speech maskers symmetrically spaced at ±90°; 11.6 dB in Marrone et al 2008; 12.0 dB in Brown et al 2010; 12.1 dB in Kidd et al 2010; 12.2 dB in Zhang et al 2020), but similar to the mean MR for Mandarin-speaking NH listeners in Zhang et al (2020; 13.7 dB). Note that the same stimuli and protocols were used in the present study and Zhang et al (2020) except that stimuli were presented in sound field in the present study and via headphones using head-related transfer functions in Zhang et al (2020). There was no significant difference between MR with spatial cues between Zhang et al (2020) and the present study ( P = 0.201).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 68%

“…Note that the same stimuli and protocols were used in the present study and Zhang et al (2020) except that stimuli were presented in sound field in the present study and via headphones using head-related transfer functions in Zhang et al (2020). There was no significant difference between MR with spatial cues between Zhang et al (2020) and the present study ( P = 0.201).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochlear Implant Facilitates the Use of Talker Sex and Spatial Cues to Segregate Competing Speech in Unilaterally Deaf Listeners

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Talker sex and spatial cues can facilitate segregation of competing speech. However, the spectrotemporal degradation associated with cochlear implants (CIs) can limit the benefit of talker sex and spatial cues. Acoustic hearing in the nonimplanted ear can improve access to talker sex cues in CI users. However, it’s unclear whether the CI can improve segregation of competing speech when maskers are symmetrically placed around the target (i.e., when spatial cues are available), compared with acoustic hearing alone. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a CI can improve segregation of competing speech by individuals with unilateral hearing loss. Design: Speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) for competing speech were measured in 16 normal-hearing (NH) adults and 16 unilaterally deaf CI users. All participants were native speakers of Mandarin Chinese. CI users were divided into two groups according to thresholds in the nonimplanted ear: (1) single-sided deaf (SSD); pure-tone thresholds <25 dB HL at all audiometric frequencies, and (2) Asymmetric hearing loss (AHL; one or more thresholds > 25 dB HL). SRTs were measured for target sentences produced by a male talker in the presence of two masker talkers (different male or female talkers). The target sentence was always presented via loudspeaker directly in front of the listener (0°), and the maskers were either colocated with the target (0°) or spatially separated from the target at ±90°. Three segregation cue conditions were tested to measure masking release (MR) relative to the baseline condition: (1) Talker sex, (2) Spatial, and (3) Talker sex + Spatial. For CI users, SRTs were measured with the CI on or off. Results: Binaural MR was significantly better for the NH group than for the AHL or SSD groups (P < 0.001 in all cases). For the NH group, mean MR was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (18.8 dB) and smallest for the Talker sex cues (10.7 dB). In contrast, mean MR for the SSD group was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (14.7 dB), and smallest with the Spatial cues (4.8 dB). For the AHL group, mean MR was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (7.8 dB) and smallest with the Talker sex (4.8 dB) and the Spatial cues (4.8 dB). MR was significantly better with the CI on than off for both the AHL (P = 0.014) and SSD groups (P < 0.001). Across all unilaterally deaf CI users, monaural (acoustic ear alone) and binaural MR were significantly correlated with unaided pure-tone average thresholds in the nonimplanted ear for the Talker sex and Talker sex + spatial conditions (P < 0.001 in both cases) but not for the Spatial condition. Conclusion: Although the CI benefitted unilaterally deaf listeners’ segregation of competing speech, MR was much poorer than that observed in NH listeners. Different from previous findings with steady noise maskers, the CI benefit for segregation of competing speech from a different talker sex was greater in the SSD group than in the AHL group.

show abstract

“…Deficits in central auditory processing and/or cognitive function may significantly affect masked speech understanding 32,46,47 . Ivansic et al 21 suggested that difficulties in understanding speech in noise in tinnitus patients may be due to deficits in central processing and/or attention, and further suggested that more complex listening tasks may better reveal central difficulties for tinnitus patients.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Masker sentences were produced by 2 males (mean F0s = 143 Hz and 178 Hz) or 2 females (mean F0s = 208 Hz and 248 Hz). A coordinate response matrix (CRM) test paradigm was used, similar to previous studies 24,47,49,52 . Listeners were asked to identify keywords from the Number and Color categories that were embedded in the randomly generated five-word sentences.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tinnitus impairs segregation of competing speech in normal-hearing listeners

Liu

Wang

Chen

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many tinnitus patients report difficulties understanding speech in noise or competing talkers, despite having “normal” hearing in terms of audiometric thresholds. The interference caused by tinnitus is more likely central in origin. Release from informational masking (more central in origin) produced by competing speech may further illuminate central interference due to tinnitus. In the present study, masked speech understanding was measured in normal hearing listeners with or without tinnitus. Speech recognition thresholds were measured for target speech in the presence of multi-talker babble or competing speech. For competing speech, speech recognition thresholds were measured for different cue conditions (i.e., with and without target-masker sex differences and/or with and without spatial cues). The present data suggest that tinnitus negatively affected masked speech recognition even in individuals with no measurable hearing loss. Tinnitus severity appeared to especially limit listeners’ ability to segregate competing speech using talker sex differences. The data suggest that increased informational masking via lexical interference may tax tinnitus patients’ central auditory processing resources.

show abstract

Tonal Language Speakers Are Better Able to Segregate Competing Speech According to Talker Sex Differences

Cited by 10 publications

References 57 publications

The P300 Auditory Event-Related Potential May Predict Segregation of Competing Speech by Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners

The P300 Auditory Event-Related Potential May Predict Segregation of Competing Speech by Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners

Cochlear Implant Facilitates the Use of Talker Sex and Spatial Cues to Segregate Competing Speech in Unilaterally Deaf Listeners

Tinnitus impairs segregation of competing speech in normal-hearing listeners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About