The role of silent intervals for sentence intelligibility in fluctuating noise in hearing-impaired listeners

References

• Brand T., Hohmann V. An adaptive procedure for categorical loudness scaling. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 112: 1597–1604
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brand T., Kollmeier B. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111: 2801–2810
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronkhorst A.W. The Cocktail Party Phenomenon: A Review of Research on Speech Intelligibility in Multiple-Talker Conditions. Acta Acoustica 2000; 86: 117–128
   Google Scholar
• Carhart R., Tillman T.W., Greetis E.S. Perceptual Masking in Multiple Sound Backgrounds. J Acoust Soc Am 1969; 45: 694–703
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreschler W.A., Verschuure H., Ludvigsen C., Westermann S. ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. Audiology 2001; 40: 148–157
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubno J.R., Dirks D.D., Morgan D.E. Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1984; 76: 87–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubno J.R., Horwitz A.R., Ahlstrom J.B. Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111: 2897–2907
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubno J.R., Horwitz A.R., Ahlstrom J.B. Recovery from prior stimulation: Masking of speech by interrupted noise for younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2003; 113: 2084–2094
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duquesnoy A.J. Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon 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
• Gustafsson H.Å., Arlinger S.D. Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95: 518–529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagerman B. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scan Audiol 1982; 11: 79–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology. 1997. ICRA, noise signals, Ver. 0.3.
   Google Scholar
• ISO/DIS 389-8. 2001. Draft international standard. Acousties-Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment–Part 8: Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and circumaural earphones. Annex C.
   Google Scholar
• Kollmeier, B., Müller, C., Wesselkamp, M. & Kliem, K. 1992. Weiterentwicklung des Reimtests nach Sotscheck (Further development of the rhyme test by Sotscheck). In. B. Kollmeier ( ed.) Moderne Verfahren der Sprachaudiometrie. Heidelberg: Median Verlag, pp 216–237.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson P.B., Jin S.-H., Carney A.E., Nelson D.A. Understanding speech in modulated interference: Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2003; 113: 961–968
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters R.P., Moore B.C.J., Baer T. Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 103: 577–587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R., Mimpen A.M. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiology 1979; 18: 43–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smoorenburg G.F. Speech reception in quiet and in noisy conditions by individuals with noise-induced hearing loss in relation to their tone audiogram. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 91: 421–437
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Versfeld N.J., Dreschler W.A. The relationship between the intelligibility of time-compressed speech and speech in noise in young and elderly listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111: 401–408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener, K. 2003. Factors Influencing Sentence Intelligibility in Noise, ( Dissertation). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag, http://docserver.bis.uni-oldenburg.de/publikationen/dissertation/2003/wagfac03/pdf/wagfac03.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T., Kollmeier B. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache II: Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test II: Optimization of the Oldenburg sentence test). Zeitschrift für Audiologie 1999a; 38: 44–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagener K., Brand T., Kollmeier B. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test). Zeitschrift für Audiologie 1999b; 38: 86–95
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Josvassen J.L., Ardenkjær R. Design, optimization, and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise. Int J Audiol. 2003; 42: 10–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Kühnel V., Kollmeier B. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache I: Design des Oldenburger Satztests (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test). Zeitschrift für Audiologie 1999c; 38: 4–15
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Brand T. Sentence intelligibility in noise for listeners with normal hearing and hearing impairment: Influence of measurement procedure and masking parameters. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 144–156
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar