The preferred response slopes and two-channel compression ratios in twenty listening conditions by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners and their relationship to the acoustic input

References

• Alcántara J.I., Moore B.C.J., Kühnel V., Launer S. Evaluation of the noise reduction system in a commercial digital hearing aid. Int J Audiol 2003; 42(1)34–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allegro, S., Büchler, M., & Launer, S. 2001. Automatic Sound Classification Inspired by Auditory Scene Analysis. Paper presented at the workshop on consistent and reliable acoustic cues for sound analysis (CRAC), Aalborg, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• American National Standards Institute. 1987. Specifications of hearing aid characteristics. ANSI S3.22-1987. New York, NY: ANSI.
   Google Scholar
• American National Standards Institute. 1997. Methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index. ANSI S3.5-1997. New York, NY: ANSI.
   Google Scholar
• Boymans M., Dreschler W.A. Field Trials Using a Digital Hearing Aid with Active Noise Reduction and Dual-Microphone Directionality. Audiology 2000; 39(5)260–268
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boymans M., Dreschler W.A., Schoneveld P., Verschuure H. Clinical Evaluation of a Full-digital In-the-ear Hearing Instrument. Audiol 1999; 38: 99–108
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bray V. What digital hearing aids can do: Another perspective. Hear J 2002; 55: 60–64
   Google Scholar
• Bray V., Nilsson M. Additive Impact of Signal Processing Features on speech Intelligibility in Noise. Austr NZ J of Audiol 2002; 23: 75
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D. Effects of frequency response characteristics on speech discrimination and perceived intelligibility and pleasantness of speech for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 80(2)494–504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H., Tran K., Arlinger S., Wilbraham K., et al. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 96(4)2108–2120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Parkinson A., Newall P. Hearing Aid Gain and Frequency Response Requirements for the Severely/Profoundly Hearing Impaired. Ear Hear 1990; 11(1)40–49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G. C. Preferred hearing aid gain in everyday environments. Ear Hear 1991; 12(2)123–126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. Prediction of hearing aid benefit: the role of preferred listening levels. Ear Hear 1994; 15(1)22–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H. Converting Insertion Gain to and from Headphone Coupler Responses. Ear Hear 1997; 18(4)346–348
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H., Lovegrove R. Single-microphone Noise Reduction Systems for Hearing Aids: A review and an evaluation. Acoustical Factors affecting Hearing Aid Performance, G.A. Studebaker, I. Hockberg. Allyn and Bacon, Boston 1993; 353–372
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein D.P., Shields A.R., Sandlin R.E. A multiple memory, digitally controlled hearing instrument. Hear Instrum, 18 1991; 42: 20–21
   Google Scholar
• Harford E.R., Fox J. The use of high-pass amplification for broad-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology 1978; 17: 10–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kates J.M. Optimal estimation of hearing-aid compression parameters. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 94: 1–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keidser G. The relationship between listening situations and alternative amplification schemes for multiple memory hearing aids. Ear Hear 1995; 6: 575–586
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G. Selecting different amplification for different listening situations. J Am Acad Audiol 1996; 7: 92–104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keidser G., Brew C., Peck A. Proprietary fitting algorithms compared with one another and with generic formulas. Hear J 2003; 56(3)28,32–34,36–37
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Ching T., Dillon H., Agung K., Brew C., et al. The National Acoustic Laboratories’ (NAL) CDs of Speech and Noise for Hearing Aid Evaluation: Normative Data and Potential Applications. Austr NZ J Audiol 2002; 24(1)16–35
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Dillon H., Byrne D. Candidates for multiple frequency response characteristics. Ear Hear 1995; 6: 562–574
   Google Scholar
• Kuk F.K. Preferred insertion gain of hearing aids in listening and reading-aloud situations. J Speech Hear Res 1990; 33: 520–529
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuk F.K. Evaluation of the efficacy of a multi-memory hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol 1992; 3: 338–348
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuk F.K., Harper T., Doubek K. Preferred real-ear insertion gain on a commercial hearing aid at different speech and noise levels. J Am Acad Audiol 1994; 5: 99–109
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ludvigsen, C. 2001. Audiological background and design rationale of Senso Diva. Widexpress 15 (February), 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Ludvigsen C., Elberling C., Keidser G. Evaluation of a noisereduction method-comparison between observed scores and scores predicted from STI. Scand Audiol 1993; 38(suppl): 50–55
   Google Scholar
• Lurquin P, Delacressonniere C, May A. Examination of a Multi-Band Noise System. Hear Rev 2001; 8(1)48–54,60
   Google Scholar
• Neuman A.C., Bakke M.H., Hellman S., Levitt H. Preferred listening levels for linear and slow-acting compression hearing aids. Ear Hear 1995; 16(4)407–416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman A.C., Levitt H., Mills R., Schwander T. An evaluation of three adaptive hearing aid selection strategies. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 82(6)1967–1976
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. Noise, Amplification and Compression: Considerations of Three Main Issues in Hearing Aid Design. Ear Hear 1994; 15(1)2–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Punch J.L., Beck E.L. Low-frequency response of hearing aids and judgments of aided speech quality. J Speech Hear Dis 1980; 45: 325–335
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Punch J.L., Beck L.B. Relative effects of low-frequency amplification on syllable recognition and speech quality. Ear Hear 1986; 7(2)57–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Punch J.L., Parker C.A. Pairwise listener preferences in hearing aid evaluation. J Speech Hear Res 1981; 24: 366–374
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Punch J.L., Robb R. Prescriptive hearing aid fitting by parameter adjustment and selection. J Am Acad Audiol 1992; 3: 94–100
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Punch J.L., Robb R., Shovels A.H. Aided Listener Preferences in Laboratory Versus Real-World Environments. Ear Hear 1994; 15(1)50–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringdahl A., Eriksson-Mangold M., Israelsson B., Lindkvist A., Lejlon A., et al. Clinical trials with a programmable hearing aid set for various listening environments. Br J Audiol 1990; 24: 235–242
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sandlin R.E., Andersen H.H. Development of a remote-controlled, programmable hearing system. Hear Instrum 1989; 40(4)33–34,36,60
   Google Scholar
• Smeds, K., Keidser, G., Zakis, J., Dillon, H., Lejion, A., , et al in press. Preferred overall loudness. I: Sound field presentation in the laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Souza P.E. Effects of Compression on Speech Acoustics, Intelligibility, and Sound quality. Trends Amp 2002; 6(4)131–165
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stelmachowicz P.G., Lewis D.E., Carney E. Preferred hearing-aid frequency responses in simulated listening environmnets. J Speech Hear Res 1994; 37: 712–719
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tecca J.E., Goldstein D.P. Effect of low-frequency hearing aid response on four measures of speech perception. Ear Hear 1984; 5: 22–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trine T.D. Digital hearing aid design: Fact vs Fantasy. Hear J 2002; 55(2)36–40
   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(1)211–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Dijkhuizen J.N., Festen J.M., Plomp R. The effect of frequency-selective attenuation on the speech-reception threshold of sentences in conditions of low-frequency noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 90(2)885–894
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Mackelenberg, R. (Speaker). 1991. Flying hero class. (ISBN 064212955X). Australia: KGC Magnetic Tapes.
   Google Scholar
• Van Tasell D.J., Larsen S. Y., Fabry D.A. Effects of an adaptive filter hearing aid on speech recognition in noise by hearing-impaired subjects. Ear Hear 1988; 9(1)15–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuure H., Prinsen T.T., Dreschler W.A. The Effects of Syllabic Compression and Frequency Shaping on Speech Intelligibility in Hearing Impaired People. Ear Hear 1994; 15(1)13–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widin G.P., Mangold S. Fitting a programmable hearing instrument. Hear Instrum 1988; 39(6)38–41,54
   Google Scholar