Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting: II. Hearing aids with multi-channel compression

References

• Boothroyd A. Developments in speech audiometry. Sound 1968; 2: 3–10
   Google Scholar
• 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: 257–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D, Dillon H, Tran K. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 96: 2108–20
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R M, Alexander G C. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 176–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French N R, Steinberg J C. Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. J Acoust Soc Am 1947; 19: 90–119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg B R, Moore B CJ. Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 79: 1020–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goedegebure A, Hulshof M, Maas A JJ, Verschuure J. The effects of syllabic compression on speech intelligibility in hearing impaired. Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids, B. Kollmeier. World Scientific, Singapore 1996; 165–70
   Google Scholar
• ISO 389–7. Acoustics—Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment. Part 7: Reference threshold of hearing under free-field and diffuse-field listening conditions. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 1996
   Google Scholar
• Killion M C. Hearing aids: Past, present and future: Moving toward normal conversations in noise. Br J Audiol 1997; 31: 141–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B, Hohmann V. Loudness estimation and compensation employing a categorical scale. Advances in Hearing Research, G. A. Manley, G. M. Klump, C. Köppl, H. Fasti, H. Oeckinghaus. World Scientific Publishers, Singapore 1995; 441–51
   Google Scholar
• Laurence R F, Moore B CJ, 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
• 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
• Moore B CJ. How much do we gain by gain control in hearing aids?. Acta Otolaryngol 1990; Suppl. 469: 250–6
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ. Signal processing to compensate for reduced dynamic range. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology, J. Beilin, G. R. Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1993; 147–65
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1988; 22: 93–104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. A model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Auditory Neurosci 1997; 3: 289–311
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. I. Linear hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1998; 32: 301–19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Alcántara J I, Glasberg B R. Development and evaluation of a procedure for fitting multi-channel compression hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1998; 32: 177–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R, Stone M A. Optimization of a slow-acting automatic gain control system for use in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1991; 25: 171–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Johnson J S, Clark T M, Pluvinage V. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992a; 13: 349–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Lynch C, Stone M A. Effects of the fitting parameters of a two-channel compression system on the intelligibility of speech in quiet and in noise. Br J Audiol 1992b; 26: 369–79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R, Baer T. A model for the prediction of thresholds, loudness and partial loudness. J Audio Eng Soc 1997; 45: 224–40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, 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 1999; 105: 400–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavlovic C. Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 82: 413–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearsons K S, Bennett R L, Fidell S. Speech Levels in Various Environments. Report No. 3281. Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA 1976
   Google Scholar
• Plomp R. Noise, amplification, and compression: Considerations of three main issues in hearing aid design. Ear Hear 1994; 15: 2–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone M A, Moore B CJ, Alcantara J I, Glasberg B R. Comparison of different forms of compression using wearable digital hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1999
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuure J, Dreschler W A. Dynamic compression in hearing aids. Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids, B. Kollmeier. World Scientific, Singapore 1996; 153–64
   Google Scholar