No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
High sentence predictability increases the fluctuating masker benefit
1. Akeroyd, M. A. (2008). “ Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults,” Int. J. Audiol. 47, S53–S71.
2. Bacon, S. P. , Opie, J. M. , and Montoya, D. Y. (1998). “ The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 41, 549–563.
4. Bernstein, J. G. W. , and Grant, K. W. (2009). “ Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125(5), 3358–3572.
5. Besser, J. , Koelewijn, T. , Zekveld, A. A. , Kramer, S. E. , and Festen, J. M. (2013). “ How linguistic closure and verbal working memory relate to speech recognition in noise—A review,” Trends Amplif. 17(2), 75–93.
6. Besser, J. , Zekveld, A. A. , Kramer, S. E. , and Festen, J. M. (2012). “ New measures of masked text recognition in relation to speech-in-noise perception and their associations with age and cognitive abilities,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 55, 194–209.
7. Gustafsson, H. A. , and Arlinger, S. D. (1994). “ Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95(1), 518–529.
8. Kalikow, D. , Stevens, K. , and Elliott, L. (1977). “ Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61(5), 1337–1351.
11. Rönnberg, J. , Rudner, M. , Lunner, T. , and Zekveld, A. A. (2010). “ When cognition kicks in: Working memory and speech understanding in noise,” Noise Health 12(49), 263–269.
12. Rosen, S. , Souza, P. , Ekelund, C. , and Majeed, A. A. (2013). “ Listening to speech in a background of other talkers: Effects of talker number and noise vocoding,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133(4), 2431–2443.
13. Rothauser, E. H. , Chapman, N. D. , Guttman, N. , Nordby, K. S. , Silbiger, H. R. , Urbanek, G. E. , and Weinstock, M. (1969). “ IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements,” IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. 17, 225–246.
14. Wilson, R. H. , and Carhart, R. (1969). “ Influence of pulsed masking on the threshold for spondees,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 46(4), 998–1010.
15. Zekveld, A. A. , George, E. L. J. , Kramer, S. E. , Goverts, S. T. , and Houtgast, T. (2007). “ The development of the text reception threshold test: A visual analogue of the speech reception threshold test,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 50(3), 576–584.
Article metrics loading...
This study examined the effects of sentence predictability and masker modulation type on the fluctuating masker benefit (FMB), the improvement in speech reception thresholds resulting from fluctuations imposed on a steady-state masker. Square-wave modulations resulted in a larger FMB than sinusoidal ones. FMBs were also larger for high compared to low-predictability sentences, indicating that high sentence predictability increases the benefits from glimpses of the target speech in the dips of the fluctuating masker. In addition, sentence predictability appears to have a greater effect on sentence intelligibility when the masker is fluctuating than when it is steady-state.
Full text loading...
Most read this month