A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise

References

• Barón de Otero C., Brik G., Flores L., Ortiz S. & Abdala C. 2008. The Latin-American Spanish hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 362–363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bent T. & Bradlow A.R. 2003. The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. J Acoust Soc Am, 114, 1600–1610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cárdenas R. & Marrero V. 1994. Cuaderno de logoaudiometría (in Spanish) (Notebook on speech audiometry). Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.
   Google Scholar
• Davies M. 2006. A Frequency Dictionary of Spanish: First edition. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hagerman B. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huarte A. 2008. The Castilian Spanish hearing in noise test. Int J Audiol, 47, 369–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO 8253 - 3:1996 Acoustics - Audiometric test methods - Part 3: Speech audiometry. International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• ISO 389 - 8:2004. Acoustics - Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment - Part 8: Reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and circumaural earphones. International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. & Wesselkamp M. 1997. Development and evaluation of a sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am, 102, 2412–2421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. 1990. Messmethodik, Modellierung, und Verbesserung der Verständlichkeit von Sprache (in German). (Methodology, modeling, and improvement of speech intelligibility measurements). Habilitation thesis. Göttingen: University of Göttingen.
   Google Scholar
• Moreno Sandoval A., Toledano D.T., de la Torre R., Garrote M. & Guirao J.M. 2008. Developing a phonemic and syllabic frequency inventory for spontaneous spoken Castilian Spanish and their comparison to text-based inventories. Proceedings of the 6th Language Resources Evaluation Conference LREC, Marrakech, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson M., 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozimek E., Warzybok A. & Kutzner D. 2010. Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise. Int J Audiol, 49, 444–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez H.E. 2003. Frecuencia de Fonemas (in Spanish) (Phoneme frequency). Revista Electrónica en Tecnologías del Habla, N1.
   Google Scholar
• Plomp R. & Mimpen A.M. 1979. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiol, 18, 43–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smits C., Kapteyn T. & Houtgast T. 2004. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol, 43, 15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stange W. 1995. Cross-language studies of speech perception: A historical review. In: W. Stange (ed.) Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience. Baltimore: York Press, pp. 3–45.
   Google Scholar
• Tato J.M. & Alfaro A. 1949. Audiometría del lenguaje. Discriminación por vía ósea: Umbral de captación. Indice de utilidad social auditivo (in Spanish) (Speech audiometry. Discrimination via bone conduction: Detection threshold. Index of social auditory usability). Otorrinolaringológica, 1, 3.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K. 2004. Factors Influencing Sentence Intelligibility in Noise, (Dissertation). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag, http://docserver.bis.uni-oldenburg.de/publikationen/dissertation/2003/wagfac03/pdf/wagfac03.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999a. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache - Teil II: Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test - Part II: Optimization of the Oldenburg sentence tests). Z Audiol, 38, 44–56.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 1999b. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache - Teil III: Evaluierung des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test - Part III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 86–95.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K.C., Josvassen J.L. & Ardenkjaer R. 2003. Design, optimization, and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise. Int J Audiol, 42, 10–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener K. & Kollmeier B. 2005. Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests mit Kindern und Oldenburger Kinder-Satztest (in German) (Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test with children and the Oldenburg children's sentence test). Z Audiol, 44, 134–143.
   Google Scholar
• Wagener K., Kühnel V. & Kollmeier B. 1999c. Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache - Teil I: Design des Oldenburger Satztests (in German). (Development and evaluation of a German sentence test - Part I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test). Z Audiol, 38, 4–15.
   Google Scholar
• Warzybok A., Wagener K.C., Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2010. Influence of the linguistic complexity in relation to speech material on non-native speech perception in noise. Proceedings of the 36th German annual congress on acoustics DAGA, Berlin, 2010, 987–988.
   Google Scholar