References
- Akeroyd M.A. 2008. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol, 47, S53–S71.
- Allen J.B. Berkeley D.A. 1979. Image method for efficiently simulating small-room acoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 65, 943–950.
- American National Standards Institute. 1997. Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index. New York: ANSI S3.5–1997.
- American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 2005. Guidelines for Manual Pure-Tone Threshold Audiometry [Guidelines]. Available from www.asha.org/policy
- Barrenäs M. Wikström I. 2000. The influence of hearing and age on speech recognition scores in audiological patients and in the general population. Ear Hear, 21, 569–577.
- Bell T.S. Wilson R.H. 2001. Sentence recognition materials based on frequency of word use and lexical confusability. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 514–522.
- Bellis T.J. 2003a. Assessment and Management of Central Auditory Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting From Science to Practice (2nd ed.). New York: Thomson Delmar Learning.
- Bellis T.J. 2003b. Auditory processing disorders: It's not just kids who have them. The Hearing Journal, 56, 10–18.
- Bevilacqua M.C., Banhara M.R., De Costa E.A., Vignoly A.B. Alvarenga K.F. 2008. The Brazilian Portuguese Hearing in Noise Test. Int J Audiol, 47, 364–365.
- Boothroyd A. Nittrouer S. 1988. Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. J Acoust Soc Am, 84, 101–114.
- Bradlow A.R. Alexander J.A. 2007. Semantic and phonetic enhancements for speech-in-noise recognition by native and non-native listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 121, 2339–2349.
- Brand T. Kollmeier B. 2002. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 2801–2810.
- Bronkhorst A.W. Plomp R. 1988. The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 1508–1516.
- Byrne D., Dillon H., Tran K., Arlinger S., Wilbraham K. . 1994. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am, 96, 2108–2120.
- Cameron S. Dillon H. 2007a. Development of the listening in spatialized noise-sentences test (LISN-S). Ear Hear, 28, 196–211.
- Cameron S. Dillon H. 2007b. The listening in spatialized noise-sentences test (LISN-S): Test-retest reliability study. Int J Audiol, 46, 145–153.
- Carstens W.A.M. 2003. Norme vir Afrikaans: Enkele riglyne by die gebruik van Afrikaans (4th ed.). Pretoria: Van Schaik Uitgewers.
- Cekic S. Sennaroglu G. 2008. The Turkish hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 366–368.
- Ching T., Dillon H. Byrne D. 1998. Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. J Acoust Soc Am, 103, 1128–1140.
- Crandell C.C. 1991. Individual differences in speech recognition ability: Implications for hearing aid selection. Ear Hear, 12, Suppl., 100S–108S.
- de Otero C.B., Brik G., Flores L., Ortiz S. Abdala C. 2008. The Latin American Spanish hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 362–363.
- de Schryver G. Prinsloo D.J. 2004. Spellcheckers for the South African languages, Part 1: The status quo and options for improvement. S Afr J Afr Lang, 24, 57–82.
- Dirks D.D., Takayanagi S. Moshfegh A. 2001. Effects of lexical factors on word recognition among normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 233–244.
- Dreschler W.A. Plomp R. 1985. Relations between psychophysical data and speech perception for hearing-impaired subjects. II. J Acoust Soc Am, 78, 1261–1270.
- Dreschler W.A., Verschuure H., Ludvigsen C. Westermann S. 2001. ICRA Noises: Artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. Audiology, 40, 148–157.
- Dubno J.R., Horwitz A.R. Ahlstrom J.B. 2002. Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 2897–2907.
- Duquesnoy A.J. Plomp R. 1980. Effect of reverberation and noise on the intelligibility of sentences in cases of presbyacusis. J Acoust Soc Am, 68, 537–544.
- Festen J.M. Plomp R. 1983. Relations between auditory functions in impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 73, 652–662.
- Festen J.M. Plomp R. 1986. Speech-reception threshold in noise with one and two hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 79, 465–471.
- Fletcher H. Galt R.H. 1950. The perception of speech and its relation to telephony. J Acoust Soc Am, 22, 89–151.
- French N.R. Steinberg J.C. 1947. Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. J Acoust Soc Am, 19, 90–119.
- Gatehouse S. Robinson K. 1997. Speech tests as measure of auditory processing. M. Martin, Speech Audiometry (2nd ed.). London: Whurr Publishers Ltd, 74–88.
- Hagerman D. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79–87.
- Hagerman D. 1984. Clinical measurements of speech reception thresholds in noise. Scand Audiol, 13, 57–63.
- Hällgren M., Larsby B. Arlinger S. 2006. A Swedish version of the hearing in noise test (HINT) for measurement of speech recognition. Int J Audiol, 45, 227–237.
- Hargus S.E. Gordon-Salant S. 1995. Accuracy of speech intelligibility index predictions for noise-masked young listeners with normal hearing and for elderly listeners with hearing impairment. J Speech Hear Res, 38, 234–243.
- Hirsh I.J. 1948. The influence of interaural phase on interaural summation and inhibition. J Acoust Soc Am, 20, 536–544.
- Hood J.D. Poole J.P. 1971. Speech audiometry in conductive and sensorineural hearing loss. Sound, 5, 30–38.
- Hornsby B.W.Y. 2004. The speech intelligibility index: What is it and what's it good for? Hear J, 57, 10–17.
- Houtgast T. Festen J.M. 2008. On the auditory and cognitive functions that may explain an individual's elevation of the speech reception threshold in noise. Int J Audiol, 47, 287–295.
- Huarte A. 2008. The Castilian Spanish hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 369–370.
- Humes L.E. 2002. Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 1112–1132.
- Humes L.E., Dirks D.D., Bell T.S., Ahlstbom C. Kincaid G.E. 1986. Application of the articulation index and the speech transmission index to the recognition of speech by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Speech Hear Res, 29, 447–462.
- Hutcherson R.W., Dirks D.D. Morgan D.E. 1979. Evaluation of the speech perception in noise (SPIN) test. Otolarnygol Head Neck Surg, 87, 239–245.
- Kalikow D.N., Stevens K.N. Elliott L.L. 1977. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Acoust Soc Am, 61, 1337–1351.
- Kamm C.A., Dirks D.D. Bell T.S. 1985. Speech recognition and the articulation index for normal and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 77, 281–288.
- Killion M.C. 2002. New thinking on hearing in noise: A generalized articulation index. Semin Hear, 23, 57–75.
- Killion M.C. Niquette P.A. 2000. What can the pure-tone audiogram tell us about a patient's SNR loss? The Hearing Journal, 53, 46–53.
- Kollmeier B. Wesselkamp M. 1997. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am, 102, 2412–2421.
- Konkle D.F. Rintelmann W.F. 1983. Principles of Speech Audiometry. Baltimore: University Park Press.
- Kryter K.D. 1962. Validation of the articulation index. J Acoust Soc Am, 34, 1698–1702.
- Levitt H. 1970. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49, 467–477.
- Levitt H. 1978. Adaptive testing in audiology. Scand Audiol Suppl, 6, 241–291.
- Licklider J.C.R. 1948. The influence of interaural phase relations upon the masking of speech by white noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 20, 150–159.
- Lolov S.R., Raynov A.M., Boteva I.B. Edrev G.E. 2008. The Bulgarian hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 371–372.
- Lorenzi C., Husson M., Ardoint M. Debruille X. 2006. Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: Effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception. Int J Audiol, 45, 487–495.
- Luce P.A. Pisoni D.B. 1998. Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear Hear, 19, 1–36.
- Lucks Mendel L. Danhauer J.L. 1997. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
- Lutman M.E. 1997. Speech tests in quiet and noise as a measure of auditory processing. M. Martin ,Speech Audiometry (2nd ed.). London: Whurr Publishers Ltd, 63–73.
- Lutman M.E. Clark J. 1986. Speech identification under simulated hearing aid frequency response characteristics in relation to sensitivity, frequency resolution, and temporal resolution. J Acoust Soc Am, 80, 1030–1040.
- Luts H., Boon E., Wable J. Wouters J. 2008. FIST: A French test for speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol, 47, 373–374.
- Mayo L.H., Florentine M. Buus S. 1997. Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 40, 686–693.
- McLauchlin R.M. 1980. Speech Protocols for Assessment of Persons With Limited Language Abilities. R.R. Rupp K.G. Stockdell Sr., Speech Protocols in Audiology. New York: Grune & Stratton Inc, 253–286.
- Middelweerd M.J., Festen J.M. Plomp R. 1990. Difficulties with speech intelligibilities in noise in spite of a normal pure-tone audiogram. Audiology, 29, 1–7.
- Miller G.A. Licklider J.C.R. 1950. The intelligibility of interrupted speech. J Acoust Soc Am, 22, 167–173.
- Moon S.K., Kim S.H., Mun H.A., Jung H.K., Lee J. . 2008. The Korean hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 375–376.
- Moore B.C.J. 1995. Perceptual Consequences of Cochlear Damage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Moore B.C.J. 2002. Response to ‘Articulation index predictions for hearing impaired listeners with and without cochlear dead regions’. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 2549–2550.
- Myhrum M. Moen I. 2008. The Norwegian hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 377–378.
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. 2007. Statistics about Hearing Disorders, Ear Infections, and Deafness. Retrieved February 28, 2007, from http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/hearing.asp
- Needleman A.R. 1998. Quantification of context effects in speech perception: Influence of prosody. Clin Linguist Phon, 12, 305–327.
- Neijenhuis K.A.M., Stollman M.H.P., Snik A.F.M. Van den Broek P. 2001. Development of a central auditory test battery for adults. Audiol, 40, 69–77.
- Nilsson M.J., Soli S.D. Sullivan J.A. 1994. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 1085–1099.
- Noordhoek I.M., Houtgast T. Festen J.M. 2001. Relations between intelligibility of narrow-band speech and auditory functions, both in the 1-kHz region. J Acoust Soc Am, 109, 1197–1212.
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 2002. Hearing Conservation. OSHA 3074 2002 (Revised). Available on www.osha.gov/Publications
- Ostergard C.A. 1983. Factors influencing validity and reliability of speech audiometry. Semin Hear, 4, 221–240.
- Owens E. 1983. Speech Recognition and Aural Rehabilitation. D.F. Konkle W.F. Rintelmann ,Principles of Speech Audiometry. Baltimore: University Park Press, 353–374.
- Plomp R. 1978. Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 63, 533–549.
- Plomp R. Duquesnoy A.J. 1982. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid. Scand Audiol, 11, 95–111.
- Plomp R. Mimpen A.M. 1979a. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiol, 18, 43–52.
- Plomp R. Mimpen A.M. 1979b. Speech-reception threshold for sentences as a function of age and noise level. J Acoust Soc Am, 66, 1333–1342.
- Quar T.K., Mukari S.Z.M.S., Wahab N.A.A., Razak R.A., Omar M. . 2008. The Malay hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 379–380.
- Roush J. 2001. Screening for hearing loss and otitis media in children. San Diego: Singular-Thomson Publishing Group.
- Rupp R.R. Stockdell K.G., Sr. 1980. The Roles of Speech Protocols in Audiology. R.R. Rupp K.G. Stockdell, Sr, Speech Protocols in Audiology. New York: Grune & Stratton Inc, 5–39.
- Scott T., Green W.B. Stuart A. 2001. Interactive effects of low-pass filtering and masking noise on word recognition. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 437–444.
- Shiroma M., Iwaki T., Kubo T. Soli S. 2008. The Japanese hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 381–382.
- Silverman S.R. Hirsh I.J. 1955. Problems related to the use of speech in clinical audiometry. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 64, 1234–1244.
- Soli S.D. 2008. Some thoughts on communication handicap and hearing impairment. Int J Audiol, 47, 285–286.
- Soli S.D. Wong L.L.N. 2008. Assessment of speech intelligibility in noise with the hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 356–361.
- Speaks C. Jerger J. 1965. Method for measurement of speech identification. J Speech Hear Res, 8, 185–194.
- Stephens S.D.G. 1976. The input for a damaged cochlea: A brief review. Brit J Audiol, 10, 97–101.
- Stockley K.B. Green W.B. 2000. Interlist equivalency of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in quiet and noise with adult hearing-impaired individuals. J Am Acad Audiol, 11, 91–96.
- Stuart A., Phillips D.P. Green W.B. 1995. Word recognition performance in continuous and interrupted broad-band noise by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners. Am J Otol, 16, 658–663.
- Thibodeau L.M. 1991. Exploration of factors beyond audibility that may influence speech recognition. Ear Hear, 12, 109S–115S.
- Vaillancourt V., Laroche C., Mayer C., Basque C., Nali M. . 2005. Adaptation of the HINT (hearing in noise test) for adult Canadian Francophone populations. Int J Audiol, 44, 358–369.
- van Rooij J.C.G.M. Plomp R. 1990. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II: Multivariate analyses. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 2611–2624.
- van Schijndel N.H., Houtgast T. Festen J.M. 2001. Effects of degradation of intensity, time, or frequency content on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 529–542.
- van Wieringen A. Wouters J. 2008. LIST and LINT: Sentences and numbers for quantifying speech understanding in severely impaired listeners for Flanders and The Netherlands. Int J Audiol, 47, 348–355.
- van Wijngaarden S.J., Steeneken H.J.M. Houtgast T. 2002. Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 1906–1916.
- Vermiglio A.J. 2008. The American English hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 386–387.
- Versfeld N.J., Daalder L, Festen J.M. Houtgast T. 2000. Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 1671–1684.
- Wagener K.C. 2004. Factors Influencing Sentence Intelligibility in Noise. DSc Thesis. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag. Retrieved January 24, 2008 from http://docserver.bis.uni-oldenburg.de/publikationen/dissertation/2003/wagfac03/pdf/wagfac03.pdf
- Wagener K.C. Brand T. 2005. Sentence intelligibility in noise for listeners with normal hearing and hearing impairment: Influence of measurement procedure and masking parameters. Int J Audiol, 44, 144–156.
- Weiss D. Dempsey J.J. 2008. Performance of bilingual speakers on the English and Spanish versions of the hearing in noise test (HINT). J Am Acad Audiol, 19, 5–17.
- Wilson R.H., Carnell C.S. Cleghorn A.L. 2007a. The words-in-noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 522–529.
- Wilson R.H. McArdle R. 2005. Speech signals used to evaluate functional status of the auditory system. J Rehabil Res Dev, 42 (Suppl. 2), 79–94.
- Wilson R.H., McArdle R.A. Smith S.L. 2007b. An evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 50, 844–856.
- Wilson R.H. Strouse A. 1999. Psychometrically equivalent spondaic words spoken by a female speaker. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 42, 1336–1346.
- Wilson R.H., Zizz C.A., Shanks J.E. Causey G.D. 1990. Normative data in quiet, broadband noise, and competing message for Northwestern University auditory test no. 6 by a female speaker. J Speech Hear Disord, 55, 771–778.
- Wong L.L.N. 2008. The Cantonese hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 388–390.
- Wong L.L.N., Liu S. Han N. 2008. The Mainland Mandarin hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 393–395.
- Wong L.L.N Soli S.D. 2005. Development of the Cantonese Hearing In Noise Test. Ear Hear, 26, 276–289.
- Wong L.L.N., Soli S.D., Liu S., Han N. Huang M. 2007. Development of the Mandarin hearing in noise test (MHINT). Ear Hear, 28, Suppl., 70S–74S.