Modeling alarm detection in noise for normal and hearing-impaired listeners: the effect of elevated thresholds and enlarged auditory filters

References

• Wilkins PA. A field study to assess the effects of wearing hearing protectors on the perception of warning sounds in an industrial environment. Appl Acoust. 1984;17:413–437. doi:10.1016/0003-682X(84)90003-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arz J-P, Gettliffe J-P, Delattre P. Effect of wearing hearing protectors on the audibility of railway warning signals – an experimental study. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2018;24:149–159. doi:10.1080/10803548.2017.1375733
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng Y, Giguère C, Laroche C, et al. A psychoacoustical model for specifying the level and spectrum of acoustic warning signals in the workplace. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2007;4:87–98. doi:10.1080/15459620601115768
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BC. Development and evaluation of a model for predicting the audibility of time-varying sounds in the presence of background sounds. J Audio Eng Soc. 2005;53:906–918.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ. Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hear Res. 1990;47:103–138. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(90)90170-T
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green DM, Swets JA. Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Repr. ed. Los Altos Hills (CA): Peninsula; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. Chapter 3 Appendix: signal detection theory. In: An introduction to the psychology of hearing (6th ed.). Leiden: Brill; 2012. p. 127–131.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarus H. Signal recognition and hearing protectors with normal and impaired hearing. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2005;11:233–250. doi:10.1080/10803548.2005.11076646
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fletcher H. Auditory patterns. Rev Mod Phys. 1940;12:47–65. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.12.47
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ. Frequency selectivity as a function of level and frequency measured with uniformly exciting notched noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000;108:2318–2328. doi:10.1121/1.1315291
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florentine M, Buus S, Scharf B, et al. Frequency selectivity in normally-hearing and hearing-impaired observers. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1980;23:646–669. doi:10.1044/jshr.2303.646
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BC. Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. J Acoust Soc Am. 1986; 79:1020–1033. doi:10.1121/1.393374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. Cochlear hearing loss: physiological, psychological and technical issues. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Arz J-P, Grimault N, El Sawaf O. Experimental assessment of the effect of wearing hearing protectors on the audibility of railway warning signals for normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2021;28:2358–2395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson RD. Auditory filter shapes derived with noise stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am. 1976;59:640–654. doi:10.1121/1.380914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson RD, Moore BCJ. Auditory filters and excitation patterns as representations of frequency resolution. Frequency Selectivity in Hearing. London: Springer; 1986. p. 123–177.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BC, Glasberg BR. Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level, and their use in calculating excitation patterns. Hear Res. 1987;28:209–225. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(87)90050-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson RD, Nimmo-Smith I, Weber DL, et al. The deterioration of hearing with age: frequency selectivity, the critical ratio, the audiogram, and speech threshold. J Acoust Soc Am. 1982;72:1788–1803. doi:10.1121/1.388652
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt H. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am. 1971;49(Suppl 2):467–477. doi:10.1121/1.1912375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swets JA. Signal detection and recognition by human observers: contemporary readings [Internet]. New York: Wiley; 1964. Available from: https://books.google.fr/books?id=gyJ_AAAAMAAJ
   Google Scholar
• Green DM. Detection of multiple component signals in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1958;30:904–911. doi:10.1121/1.1909400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. An introduction to the psychology of hearing (6th ed.). Leiden: Brill; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Acoustics – reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment – part 1: reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and supra-aural earphones; 2018. Standard No. NF EN ISO 389-1. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• Dienes Z. Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results. Front Psychol [Internet]; 2014 [cited 2019 May 23]. p. 5. Available from: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389fpsyg.2014.00781/abstract
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers E-J, Love J, Marsman M, et al. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: example applications with JASP. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25:58–76. doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JASP Team. JASP (version 0.11.0) [computer software] [Internet]; 2019. Available from: https://jasp-stats.org/
   Google Scholar
• Giguère C, Berger EH.. Modeling the interaction between the hearing protector attenuation function and the hearing loss profile on sound detection in noise, 31 May–3 June, Maatricht: EuroNoise; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Abel SM, Kunov H, Pichora-Fuller MK, et al. Signal detection in industrial noise: effects of noise exposure history, hearing loss, and the use of ear protection. Scand Audiol. 1985;14:161–173. doi:10.3109/01050398509045937
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Huss M, Vickers DA, et al. A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol. 2000;34:205–224. doi:10.3109/03005364000000131
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar