Effect of low-frequency gain and venting effects on the benefit derived from directionality and noise reduction in hearing aids

References

• Agnew J. The causes and effects of distortion and internal noise in hearing aids. Trends Amplif 1998; 3: 82–118
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bench J. & Bamford J.M., 1979. Speech Hearing Tests and the Spoken Language of Hearing-Impaired Children. London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Noble W. Optimizing sound localization with hearing aids. Trends Amplif 1998; 3: 51–73
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D., Noble W., LePage B. Effects of long-term bilateral and unilateral fitting of different hearing-aid types on the ability to locate sounds. J Am Acad Audiol 1992; 3: 369–382
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies, and noise reduction algorithms. Trends Amplif 2004a; 8: 83–124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part II. Feedback and occlusion effect reduction strategies, laser shell manufacturing processes, and other signal processing technologies. Trends Amplif 2004b; 8: 125–164
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Courtois J. Open molds. Hearing Aid Fitting: Theoretical and Practical Views, J.H. Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1988; 173–202
   Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. Acoustic versus electronic modifications of hearing aid low-frequency output. Ear Hear 1983; 4: 190–196
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H. Allowing for real ear venting effects when selecting the coupler gain of hearing aids. Ear Hear 1991; 12: 406–416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H. NAL-NL1: A new procedure for fitting non-linear hearing aids. Hear J 1999; 52: 10–16
   Google Scholar
• Dillon H., 2001. Hearing Aids. Sydney: Boomerang Press, pp. 130–134, 385.
   Google Scholar
• Dillon H., Keidser G., O'Brien A., Silberstein H. Sound quality comparisons of advanced hearing aids. Hear J 2003; 56: 30–40
   Google Scholar
• Fabry D.A. Facts vs myths: the ‘skinny’ on slim-tube open fittings. Hear Rev 2006; 13: 20–25
   Google Scholar
• Fabry D.A., Leek M.R., Walden B.E., Cord M. Do adaptive frequency response (AFR) hearing aids reduce ‘upward spread’ of masking?. J Rehabil Res Dev 1993; 30: 318–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn M. 2003. Opening ears: The scientific basis for an open ear acoustic system. Hear Rev, 10, 34–36, 67.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn M. 2004. Maintaining the directional advantage in open fittings. Hear Rev, 11, 32, 36.
   Google Scholar
• Gabrielsson A., Schenkman B.N., Hagerman B. The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility. J Speech Hear Res 1988; 31: 166–177
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Good M.D., Gilkey R.H. Sound localization in noise: The effect of signal-to-noise ratio. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99: 1108–1117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grover B.C., Martin M.C. Physical and subjective correlates of earmould occlusion. Audiology 1979; 18: 335–350
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamacher V., Chalupper J., Eggers J., Fischer E., Kornagel U., et al. Signal processing in high-end hearing aids: State of the art, challenges, and future trends. J Applied Sign Process 2005; 18: 2915–2929
   Google Scholar
• Harford E.R., Fox J. The use of high-pass amplification for broad-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology 1978; 17: 10–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kampe S.D., Wynne M.K. The influence of venting on the occlusion effect. Hear J 1996; 49: 59–66
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G. The relationship between listening conditions and alternative amplification schemes for multiple memory hearing aids. Ear Hear 1995a; 16: 575–586
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keidser G. Long-term spectra of a range of real-life noisy environments. Austr J Audiol 1995b; 17: 39–46
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Brew C., Brewer S., Dillon H., Grant F., et al. The preferred response slopes and two-channel compression ratios in twenty listening conditions by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners, and their relationship to the acoustic input. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 656–670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Dillon H., Byrne D. Candidates for multiple frequency response characteristics. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 562–574
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Rohrseitz K., Dillon H., Hamacher V., Carter L., et al. The effect of multi-channel wide dynamic range compression, noise reduction, and directional microphone on horizontal localization performance in hearing-aid wearers. Int J Audiol 2006; 45: 563–579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiessling J., Brenner B., Jespersen C.T., Groth J., Jensen O.D. Occlusion effect of earmoulds with different venting systems. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16: 237–249
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kiessling J., Margolf-Hackl S., Geller S., Olsen S.Ø. Researchers report on a field test of a non-occluding hearing instrument. Hear J 2003; 56: 36–41
   Google Scholar
• Killion M.C. The ‘hollow voice’ occlusion effect. Hearing Aid Fitting: Theoretical and Practical Views, J.H. Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1988; 231–242
   Google Scholar
• Kochkin S. MarkeTrek V: ‘Why my hearing aids are in the drawer’: the consumers’ perspective. Hear J 2000; 53: 34–42
   Google Scholar
• Kuk F.K. Perceptual consequence of vents in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1991; 25: 163–169
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuk F.K., Keenan D.M., Nelson J.A. Preserving directional benefits for new users wearing smaller hearing aids. Hear J 2002; 55: 46–52
   Google Scholar
• Lee L.W., Geddes E.R. Perception of microphone noise in hearing instruments. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 104: 3364–3368
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundberg G., Ovegård A., Hagerman B., Gabrielsson A., Bränström U. Perceived sound quality in a hearing aid with vented and closed earmould equalized in frequency response. Scand Audiol 1992; 21: 87–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKenzie K., Browning G.G., McClymont L.G. Relationship between earmould venting, comfort and feedback. Br J Audiol 1989; 23: 335–337
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Macrae J.H., Dillon H. An equivalent input noise level criterion for hearing aids. J Rehab Res Dev 1996; 33: 355–362
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Middlebrooks J.C., Green D.M. Sound localization by human listeners. Ann Rev Psychol 1991; 42: 135–159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueller H.G., Bright K.E., Northern J.L. Studies of the hearing-aid occlusion effect. Sem Hear 1996; 17: 21–31
   Google Scholar
• Pumford J.M., Seawald R.C., Scollie S., Jenstad L.M. Speech recognition with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear dual-microphone hearing instruments. J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11: 23–35
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Punch J.L., Montgomery A.A., Schwartz D.M., Walden B.E., Prosek R.A., Howard M.T. Multidimensional scaling of quality judgments of speech signals processed by hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1980; 68: 458–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revit L. Two techniques for dealing with the occlusion effect. Hear Instr 1992; 43: 16–18
   Google Scholar
• Ricketts T. Directivity quantification in hearing aids: Fitting and measurement effects. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 45–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricketts T. Directional hearing aids. Trends Amplif 2001; 5: 139–176
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ricketts T. Directional hearing aids: New designs and predictions applied to old concepts. Hear J 2006; 59: 10–18
   Google Scholar
• Ricketts T., Henry P. Low-frequency gain compensation in directional hearing aids. Am J Audiol 2002; 11: 29–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ricketts T.A., Henry P.P., Hornsby B.W.Y. Application of frequency importance functions to directivity for prediction of benefit in uniform fields. Ear Hear 2005; 26: 473–486
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricketts T., Lindley G., Henry P. Impact of compression and hearing-aid style on directional hearing-aid benefit and performance. Ear Hear 2001; 22: 348–361
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegel S., 1956. Nonparametric Statistics For The Behavioural Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, pp. 229–239.
   Google Scholar
• Van Buuren R.A., Festen J.M., Plomp R. Evaluation of a wide range of amplitude-frequency responses for the hearing impaired. J Speech Hear Res 1995; 38: 211–221
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van den Bogaert T., Klasen T.J., Moonen M., Van Deun L., Wouters J. Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: without is better than with. J Acoust Soc Am 2006; 119: 515–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westermann S. The occlusion effect. Hear Instr 1987; 38: 43
   Google Scholar
• Wimmer V.H. 1986. The occlusion effect from earmoulds. Hear Instr, 37, 19, 57–58.
   Google Scholar