Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids. II. Experienced users, fitted unilaterally

References

• Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carhart R C, Tillman T W. Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Arch Otolaryngol 1970; 91: 273–279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chouard N. Loudness and unpleasantness perception in dichotic conditions. PhD thesis. Universite du Maine. 1997
   Google Scholar
• Cornelisse L E, Seewald R C, Jamieson D G. The input/ output formula: a theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97: 1854–1864
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R M, Alexander G C. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 176–186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dallos P. The Auditory Periphery: Biophysics and Physiology. Academic Press, New York 1973
   Google Scholar
• Dillon H, Glinis J A. The client-oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 8: 27–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Duquesnoy A J. Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source on the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 74: 739–743
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg L S, Dirks D D, Bell T S. Speech recognition in amplitude-modulated noise of listeners with normal and listeners with impaired hearing. J Speech Hear Res 1995; 38: 222–233
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Finney D J. Probit Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1971
   Google Scholar
• Fletcher H, Munson W A. Loudness, its definition, measurement and calculation. J Acoust Soc Am 1933; 5: 82–108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher H, Munson W A. Relation between loudness and masking. J Acoust Soc Am 1937; 9: 1–10
   Google Scholar
• Hellman R P. Growth of loudness at 1000 and 3000 Hz. J Acoust Soc Am 1976; 60: 672–679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellman R P, Zwislocki J J. Monaural loudness summation at 1000 cps and interaural summation. J Acoust Soc Am 1963; 35: 856–865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hygge S, Ro¨nnberg J, Larsby B, Arlinger S. Normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects' ability to just follow conversation in competing speech, reversed speech, and noise backgrounds. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35: 208–215
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Killion M C, Fikret-Pasa S. Three types of sensorineural hearing loss: loudness and intelligibility considerations. Hear J 1993; 46: 31–36
   Google Scholar
• Laurence R F, Moore B C.J, Glasberg B R. A comparison of behind-the-ear high-fidelity linear aids and two-channel compression hearing aids in the laboratory and in everyday life. Br J Audiol 1983; 17: 31–48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Libby E R. Achieving a transparent, smooth, wideband hearing aid response. Hear Instrum 1981; 32: 9–12
   Google Scholar
• MacLeod A, Summerfield Q. A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. Br J Audiol 1990; 24: 29–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marks L E. Binaural summation of the loudness of pure tones. J Acoust Soc Am 1978; 64: 107–113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J. Perceptual Consequences of Cochlear Damage. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1995
   Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. IV. Fitting hearing aids with multi-channel compression so as to restore 'normal' loudness for speech at different levels. Br J Audiol 2000; 34: 165–177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Alca´ntara J I, Marriage J E. Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids. I. Experienced users fitted bilaterally. Br J Audiol 2001; 35, 339–353
   Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Glasberg B R. A model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Auditory Neurosci 1997; 3: 289–311
   Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Glasberg B R, Baer T. A model for the prediction of thresholds, loudness and partial loudness. J Audio Eng Soc 1997; 45: 224–240
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Glasberg B R, Stone M A. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. III. A general method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression. Br J Audiol 1999a; 33: 241–258
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Peters R W, Stone M A. Benefits of linear amplification and multi-channel compression for speech comprehension in backgrounds with spectral and temporal dips. J Acoust Soc Am 1999b; 105: 400–411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Glasberg B R, Vickers D A. Simulation of the effects of loudness recruitment on the intelligibility of speech in noise. Br J Audiol 1995; 29: 131–143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B C.J, Huss M, Vickers D A, Glasberg B R, Alca´ntara J I. A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol 2000; 34: 205–224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters R W, Moore B C.J, Baer T. Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearingimpaired and normally hearing people. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 103: 577–587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollack I. 1948. Monaural and binaural threshold sensitivity for tones and for white noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 20, 52–57
   Google Scholar
• Rhode W S. Some observations on two-tone interaction measured with the Mo¨ssbauer effect. In. Psychophysics and Physiology of Hearing, E F Evans, J P Wilson. Academic, London 1977; 27–41
   Google Scholar
• Rosowski J J. Models of external- and middle-ear function. In. Auditory Computation, H L Hawkins, T A McMullen, A N Popper, R R Fay. Springer-Verlag, New York 1996; 56–57
   Google Scholar
• Scharf B, Fishken D. Binaural summation of loudness reconsidered. J Exp Psychol 1970; 86: 374–379
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scollie S D, Seewald R C, Moodie K S, Dekok K. Preferred listening levels of children who use hearing aids: comparison to prescriptive targets. J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11: 230–238
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stevens S S. On the psychophysical law. Psych Rev 1957; 64: 153–181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• takahashi G A, Bacon S P. Modulation detection, modulation masking, and speech understanding in noise in the elderly. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35: 1410–1421
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Buuren R A, Festen J, Houtgast T. Compression and expansion of the temporal envelope: evaluation of speech intelligibility and sound quality. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 105: 2903–2913
   PubMed Web of Science ®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
• Warren R M. Elimination of biases in loudness judgements for tones. J Acoust Soc Am 1970; 48: 1397–1413
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zwicker E, Fastl H. Psychoacoustics-Facts and Models. Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1999
   Google Scholar