References
- 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: 494–504
- David H.A. The method of paired comparisons. Charles Griffin & Company Limited, London 1963
- Dirks D.D., Ahlstrom J., Noffsinger P.D. Preferred frequency response for two- and three-channel amplification systems. J Rehabil Res Dev 1993; 30: 305–317
- Eisenberg L.S., Dirks D.D., Gornbein J.A. Subjective judgments of speech clarity measured by paired comparisons and category rating. Ear Hear 1997; 18: 294–306
- Franck B.A.M., Lyzenga J., Dreschler W.A. Methodological aspects of an adaptive multidirectional pattern search to optimize speech perception using three hearing-aid algorithms. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 116: 3620–3628
- Keidser G. The relationship between listening conditions and alternative amplification schemes for multiple memory hearing aids. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 575–586
- Keidser G., Dillon H., Byrne D. Candidates for multiple frequency response characteristics. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 562–574
- Kuk F.K. Use of paired comparisons in hearing aid fitting. Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings, M. Valente. Theme Medical Publishers, New York 1994; 108–135
- Kuk F.K., Lau C. Comparison of preferred frequency gain settings obtained with category rating and modified simplex procedure. J Am Acad Audiol 1996a; 7: 322–331
- Kuk F.K., Lau C. Effect of hearing aid experience on preferred insertion gain selection. J Am Acad Audiol 1996b; 7: 274–281
- Kuk F.K., Pape N.M.C. The reliability of a modified simplex procedure in hearing aid frequency-response selection. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35: 418–429
- Kuk F.K., Pape N.M.C. Relative satisfaction for frequency responses selected with a simplex procedure in different listening conditions. J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36: 168–177
- Neuman A.C., Levitt H., Mills R., Schwander T. An evaluation of three adaptive hearing aid selection strategies. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 82: 1967–1976
- Neuman A.C., Bakke M.H., Hellman S., Levitt H. Effect of compression ratio in a slow-acting compression hearing aid: Paired-comparison judgments of quality. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 96: 1471–1478
- Neuman A.C., Bakke M.H., Mackersie C., Hellman S., Levitt H. Effect of release time in compression hearing aids: Paired-comparison judgments of quality. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 98: 3182–3187
- Parizet E. Paired comparison listening tests and circular error rates. Acta Acustica 2002; 88: 594–598
- Punch J.L., Howard M. Listener-assessed intelligibility of hearing aid-processed speech. J Am Audiol Soc 1978; 4: 69–76
- Purdy S.C., Pavlovic Ch.V. Reliability, sensitivity and validity of magnitude estimation, category scaling, and paired-comparison judgments of speech intelligibility by older listeners. Audiology 1992; 31: 254–271
- Studebaker, G.A., Bisset, J.D., Ort D.M. van & Hoffnung, S. 1982. Paired comparison judgments of relative intelligibility in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 72, 80–92.
- Versfeld N.J., Daalder L., Festen J.M., Houtgast T. Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 107: 1671–1684
- Zerlin S. A new approach to hearing aid selection. J Speech Hear Res 1962; 5: 370–376