Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise

References

• Brachmański S. & Staroniewicz P. 1999. Fonetyczna struktura materiału testowego stosowanego w subiektywnych pomiarach jakości mowy (in Polish) (Phonetic structure of test material for subjective assessments of speech quality). Speech and Language Technology, Poznań, 3, 71–80.
   Google Scholar
• Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2002. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 2801–2810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagerman B. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hällgren M., Larsby B. & Arlinger S. 2006. A Swedish version of the hearing in noise test (HINT) for measurement of speech recognition. Int J Acoust, 45, 227–237.
   Google Scholar
• Klein S.A. 2001. Measuring, estimating, and understanding of psychometric function: A commentary. Percept Psychophys, 63, 1421–1455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. & Wesselkamp M. 1997. Development and evaluation of a sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am, 102, 1085–1099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. 1990. Messmetodik, Modellierung, und Verbeserung der Verstandlichkeir von Sprache. (in German) (Methodology, modeling, and improvement of speech intelligibility measurements). Habilitation thesis, Göttingen, University of Göttingen.
   Google Scholar
• Kurcz I., Lewicki A., Sambor J., Szafran K. & Woronczak J. 1990. Słownik frekwencyjny polszczyzny współczesnej. Kraków, Instytut języka polskiego PAN.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt H. 1971. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49, 467–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luts H., Boon E., Wable J. & Wouters J. 2008. FIST: A French sentence test for speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol, 47, 373–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson M., Soli S.D. & Sullivan J.A. 1994. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 1085–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Regan J.K. & Humbert R. 1989. Estimating psychometric functions in forced-choice situations: Significant biases found in threshold and slope estimations when small samples are used. Percept Psychophys, 46, 434–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozimek E., Kutzner D., Sęk A. & Wicher A. 2009a. Development and evaluation of Polish digit triplet test for auditory screening. Speech Commun, 31, 307–316.
   Google Scholar
• Ozimek E., Kutzner D., Sęk A. & Wicher A. 2009b. Polish sentence tests for measuring the intelligibility of speech in interfering noise. Int J Audiol, 48, 433–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. & Mimpen A.M. 1979a. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiol, 18, 43–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Plomp R. & Mimpen A.M. 1979b. Speech-reception threshold for sentences as a function of age and noise level. J Acoust Soc Am, 66, 1333–1342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pruszewicz A., Demenko G., Richter L. & Wika T. 1994a. New articulation lists for speech audiometry. Part I. Otolaryngol Pol, 48, 50–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pruszewicz A., Demenko G., Richter L. & Wika T. 1994b.. New articulation lists for speech audiometry. Part II. Otolaryngol Pol, 48, 56–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smits C. & Houtgast T. 2006. Measurements and calculations on the simple up-down adaptive procedure for speech-in-noise tests. J Acoust Soc Am, 120, 1608–1621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smits C., Kapteyn T. & Houtgast T. 2004. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol, 43, 15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Versfeld N.J., Daalder L., Festen J.M. & Houtgast T. 2000. Method for the selection of sentence material for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 1671–1684.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K. 2003. Factors influencing sentence intelligibility in noise. PhD Dissertation, University of Oldenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999a. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test (in German). Z Audiol, 38, 4–15.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999b. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test II: Optimization of the Oldenburg sentence tests (in German). Z Audiol, 38, 44–56.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999c. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test (in German). Z Audiol, 38, 86–95.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Eeenboom F., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2005. Ziffer-Tripel-Test: Spracherverstandlichkeitstest uber das Telefon. Tagungs-CD der DGA Jahrestagung.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Josvassen J.L. & Ardenkjaer R. 2003. Design, optimization, and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise. Int J Audiol, 42, 10–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetherhill G.B. 1963. Sequential estimation of quantal response curves. J R Stat SocSer B Methodol, 25, 1–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar