The multilingual matrix test: Principles, applications, and comparison across languages: A review

References

• Akeroyd M.A., Arlinger S., Bentler R.A. et al. 2015. ICRA recommendations for the construction of multilingual speech tests. Int J Audiol, 54(S2), DOI 10.3109/14992027.2015.1030513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arweiler I., Buchholz J.M. & Dau T. 2013. The influence of masker type on early reflection processing and speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 133(1), 13–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®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(6), 2801–2810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brand T., Wittkop T., Wagener K. & Kollmeier B. 2004. Vergleich von Oldenburger Satztest und Freiburger Wörtertest als geschlossenen Versionen. Proceedings of 7th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Leipzig, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Bronkhorst A.W. 2000. The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Acta Acust, 86, 117–128.
   Google Scholar
• Büchner A., Schüssler M., Battmer R.D., Stöver T., Lesinski-Schiedat A. et al. 2009. Impact of low-frequency hearing. Audiol Neurotol, 14, 8–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H., Tran K., Arlinger S. & Wilbraham K. 1994. An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am, 96(4), 2108–2120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. 2002. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge University Press. An online version available at http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/cadre_en.asp
   Google Scholar
• Dietz A., Buschermöhle M., Aarnisalo A.A., Vanhanen A., Hyyrynen T. et al. 2014. The development and evaluation of the Finnish Matrix Sentence Test for speech intelligibility assessment. Acta Otolaryngol, 134(7), 728–737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreschler W.A., Van Esch T.E., Larsby B., Hallgren M., Lutman M.E. et al. 2008. Charactering the individual ear by the ‘Auditory Profile’. J Acoust Soc Am, 123, 3714 (A).
   Google Scholar
• Dreschler W.A., Verschuure H., Ludvigsen C. & Westermann S. 2001. ICRA noises: Artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. Audiol, 40(3), 148–157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hagerman B. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagerman B. & Kinnefors C. 1995. Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise. Scand Audiol, 24(1), 71–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hall S. 2006. The development of a new English sentence in noise test and an English number recognition test (unpublished master's thesis). University of Southampton, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Haumann S., Battmer R. -D., Büchner A., Lesinski-Schiedat A., Brand T. et al. 2011. Klinische Anwendung neuer audiometrischer Messmethoden. Proceedings of 11th congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Jena.
   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 Audiol, 45, 227–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewitt D.R. 2008. Evaluation of an English speech-in-noise audiometry test. Faculty of Engineering, Science and Mathematics Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Hochmuth S., Brand T., Zokoll M.A., Zenker Castro F., Wardenga N. et al. 2012. A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise. Int J Audiol, 51, 536–544.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochmuth S., Jürgens T., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2015. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests. Int J Audiol, 54(S2), DOI 10.3109/14992027.2015.1088174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochmuth S., Jürgens T., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2014. Multilingual Cocktailparty – Einfluss von sprecher- und sprachspezifischen Faktoren auf die Sprachverständlichkeit im Störschall. Proceedings of 17th congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Oldenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Houben R., Koopman J., Luts H., Wagener K.C., van Wieringen A. et al. 2014. Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol, 53, 760–763.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen S., Luts H., Wagener K.C., Kollmeier B., Del Rio M. et al 2012. Comparison of three types of French speech-in-noise tests: A multi-center study. Int J Audiol, 51, 164–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. 1990. Meßmethodik, Modellierung und Verbesserung der Versta ndlichkeit von Sprache (Measurement methods, models and improvement of the intelligibility of speech), Habilitationsschrift (Habilitation treatise). University of Go ttingen, Fachbereich Physik, D- Go ttingen.
   Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B., Lenarz T., Winkler A., Zokoll M., Sukowski H. et al. 2011. Hörgeräte-Indikation nach modernen Verfahren der Sprachaudiometrie im Deutschen. HNO, 59, 1012–1021.
   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
• MacPherson A. & Akeroyd M.A. 2014. Variations in the slope of the psychometric functions for speech intelligibility: A systematic survey. Trends Hear, 18, 1–26.
   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(2), 1085–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozimek E., Kutzner D., Sek A., Wicher A. & Szczepaniak O. 2006. The Polish sentence test for speech intelligibility evaluations. Arch Acoust, 31 (4), 431–438.
   Google Scholar
• Ozimek E., Warzybok A. & Kutzner D. 2010. Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise. Int J Audiol, 49, 444–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Øygarden J. 2009. Norwegian speech audiometry. PhD Thesis, Trondheim, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen E.R. & Uhl P.M. 2014. User-operated speech in noise test: Implementation and comparison with a traditional test. Int J Audiol, 53(5), 336–344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peissig J. & Kollmeier B. 1997. Directivity of binaural noise reduction in spatial multiple noise-source arrangements for normal and impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 101(3), 1660–1670.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Platte H.J. & Vom Hövel H. 1980. Zur Deutung der Ergebnisse von Sprachverständlichkeitsmessungen mit Störschall im Freifeld. Acustica, 45(3), 139–150.
   Google Scholar
• Plomp R. 1976. Aspects of Tone Sensation: A Psychophysical Study. London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plomp R. & Mimpen A.M. 1979. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiol, 18(1), 43–52.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Puglisi G.E., Warzybok A., Hochmuth S., Astolfi A., Prodi N., Visentin Ch. & Kollmeier B. 2014. Construction and first evaluation of the Italian Matrix Sentence Test for the assessment of speech intelligibility in noise. In PROCEEDINGS OF FORUM ACUSTICUM (pp. 1–5). PAS-Polish Acoustical Society.
   Google Scholar
• Rader T., Fastl H. & Baumann U. 2013. Speech perception with combined electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) and bilateral cochlear implant in a multi-source noise field. Ear Hear, 34(3), 324–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rennies J., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2011. Prediction of the influence of reverberation on binaural speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet. J Acoust Soc Am, 130, 2999–3012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rennies J., Warzybok A., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2014. Modeling the effects of a single reflection on binaural speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 135, 1556–1567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smits C., Kapteyn T.S. & Houtgast T. 2004. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol, 43(1), 15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soli S.D. & Wong L.L.N. 2008. Assessment of speech intelligibility in noise with the Hearing in Noise Test. Int J Audiol, 47, 356–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theunissen M., Hanekom J.J. & Swanepoel D.W. 2011. The development of an Afrikaans test for sentence recognition thresholds in noise. Int J Audiol, 50, 77–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Esch T.E.M., Kollmeier B, Vormann M., Lyzenga J., Houtgast T. et al. 2013. Evaluation of the preliminary Auditory Profile test battery in an international multi-centre study. Int J Audiol, 52, 305–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlaming M.S., Kollmeier B., Dreschler W.A., Martin R., Wouters J. et al. 2011. Hearcom: Hearing in the communication society. Acta Acust United Ac, 97(2), 175–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vom Hövel H. 1984. Zur Bedeutung der Übertragungseigenschaften des Außenohrs sowie des binauralen Hörsystems bei gestörter Sprachübertragung. Dissertation, Fakultät für Elektrotechnik, RTWH Aachen.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999a. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache Teil II: Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German speech intelligibility test. Part II: Optimization of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 44–56.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999b. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache Teil III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German speech intelligibility test. Part III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 86–95.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Kühnel V. & Kollmeier B. 1999c. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache I: Design des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German speech intelligibility test. Part I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 4–15.
   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
• Wagener K.C. 2004. Factors influencing sentence intelligibility in noise. BIS - Verlag Oldenburg, ISBN 3-8142-0897-8.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Eenboom F., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2005. Ziffern-Tripel-Test: Sprachversta ndlichkeitstest u ber das Telefon (Digit triplet test: speech intelligibility test over telephone) Proceedings of 8th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Go ttingen.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C. & Brand T. 2005. Sentence intelligibility in noise for listeners with normal hearing and hearing impairment: Influence of measurement procedure and masking parameters. Int J Audiol, 44(3), 144–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Bräcker T., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2006. Evaluation des Ziffern-Tripel-Test über Kopfhörer und Telefon. Proceedings of 9th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Köln.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2006a. The role of silent intervals for sentence intelligibility in fluctuating noise in hearing-impaired listeners. Int J Audiol, 45(1), 26–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2007. International cross-validation of sentence intelligibility tests. In 8th EFAS Congress / 10th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, pp. CD-Rom, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Adiologie e.V., Heidelberg, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Hochmuth S., Ahrlich M., Zokoll-v. d. Laan M. & Kollmeier B. 2014. Der weibliche Oldenburger Satztest. Proceedings of 17th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Oldenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Wardenga N., Thiele C., Büchner A. & Lenarz T. 2012. Bezugswerte für den Oldenburger Satztest bei Personen verschiedener Audiogrammkategorien. (Poster) 15th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Erlangen.
   Google Scholar
• Warzybok A., Rennies J., Brand T., Doclo S. & Kollmeier B. 2013. Effects of spatial and temporal integration of a single early reflection on speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 133(1), 269–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warzybok A., Kodrasi I., Jungmann J.O. Habets E.A.P., Gerkmann T. et al. 2014. Subjective speech quality and speech intelligibility evaluation of single-channel dereverberation algorithms. To appear in the Proc of the International Workshop on Acoustic Signal Enhancement (IWAENC), 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Warzybok A., Zokoll M., Wardenga N., Ozimek E., Boboshko M. et al. 2015a. Development of the Russian Matrix Sentence Test. Int J Audiol, 54(S2), 10.3109/14992027.2015.1020969.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warzybok A., Brand T., Wagener K.C., Kollmeier B. (2015b). How much does language proficiency by non-native listeners influence speech audiometric tests in noise? Int J Audiol, 54(S2), DOI:10.3109/14992027.2015.1063715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zokoll M.A., Wagener K.C., Brand T., Buschermöhle M. & Kollmeier B. 2012. Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: The German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype. Int J Audiol, 51, 697–707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zokoll M.A., Hochmuth S., Warzybok A., Wagener K.C., Buschermöhle M. et al. 2013. Speech-in-noise tests for multilingual hearing screening and diagnostics. Am J Audiol, 22(1), 175–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zokoll M.A., Wagener, K. 2014. Erster Praxistest mit dem Türkischen Matrix test. 17th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Oldenburg, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Zokoll M.A., Warzybok A., Carroll R., Hochmuth S., Kreisman B. 2013. Design, Optimierung und Evaluation eines Amerikanisch Englischen Matrix Test. (Poster) 16th Congress of the German Society of Audiology, Germany, Rostock.
   Google Scholar