References
- 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: 885–894
- Humes L E, Christensen L A, Bess F H. A comparison of the benefit provided by well-fit linear hearing aids and instruments with automatic reductions of low-frequency gain. J Speech Lan Hear Res 1997; 40: 666–685
- Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. A comparison of two-channel and single-channel compression hearing aids. Audiology 1986; 25: 210–226
- Gordon-Salant S, LaGuinn P S. Performance with an adaptive frequency response hearing aid in a sample of elderly hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 255–262
- Boymans M, Schoneveld P, Verschuure J. Clinical evaluation of a full-digital in-the-ear hearing instrument. Audiology 1999; 38: 99–108
- Valente M, Fabry D A, Potts L G. Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. J Am Acad Audiol 1995; 6: 440–449
- Dreschler W A, Boymans M, Verschuure J. Fitting and evaluation of advanced signal processing in hearing aids. Z Audiol 2000; 38: 186–190
- Bachmann J, Kiessling J. A comparison of hearing aid fitting procedures with and without categorical loudness scaling [in German]. Audiol Acoust 1998; 37: 16–29
- Valente M. Strategies for selecting and verifying hearing aid fittings. Thieme Verlag, New York 1994
- Cox R M, Alexander G C. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 176–183
- Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J AcoustSocAm 1992; 92: 1258–1268
- Holube L. Signalverarbeitungsalgorithmen für dig-itale Hörgeräte. Audiol Acoust 1998; 37: 176–182
- Merks I LDM. Binaural application of microphone arrays for improved speech intelligibility in a noisy environment. Delft, The Netherlands, Technical University Delft 2000
- 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 SocAm 1995; 97: 1854–1864
- Byrne D, Arlinger S, Wilbraham K, et al. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust SocAm 1994; 96: 2108–2120
- Kiessling J. Loudness growth in sensorineural hearing lossconsequences for hearing aid design and fitting. Audiol Acoust 1995; 34: 82–89
- Plomp R, Mimpen A M. Improving the reliability of testing the speech-reception threshold for sentences. Audiology 1979; 18: 43–52
- Eisenberg L S, Dirks D D, Gornbein J A. Subjective judgements of speech clarity measured by paired comparisons and category rating. Ear Hear 1997; 18: 294–306
- Kuk F K. Use of paired comparisons in hearing aid fittings. Strategies for selecting and verifying hearing aid fittings, M Valente. Thieme Verlag, New York 1994; 108–135
- Stelmachowicz P G, Dalzell L E, Peterson D N, Kopun J G, Lewis D E, Hoover B E. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids. Ear Hear 1998; 19: 131–138
- Wouters J, Litiere L, van Wieringen A. Speech intelligibility in noisy environments with one-and two-microphone hearing aids. Audiology 1999; 38: 91–98
- Ricketts T, Dhar S. Comparison of performance scores across three directional hearing aids. J Am AcadAudiol 1999; 10: 180–189
- Pumford J M, Seewald R C, Scollie S D, Jenstad L M. Speech recognition with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear dual-microphone hearing instruments. J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11: 23–35