Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss

References

• Alexander J.M. 2013. Individual variability in recognition of frequency- lowered speech. Semin Hear, 34, 86–109.
   Google Scholar
• Arehart K., Souza P., Baca R. & Kates J. 2013. Working memory, age, and hearing loss: Susceptibility to hearing-aid distortion. Ear Hear, 34, 251–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler R.A., Niebuhr D.P., Getta J.P. & Anderson C.V. 1993. Longitudinal study of hearing-aid effectiveness. I: Objective measures. J Speech Hear Res, 36, 808–819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohnert A., Nyffeler M. & Keilmann A. 2010. Advantages of a non-linear frequency compression algorithm in noise. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Suppl, 267, 1045–1053.
   Google Scholar
• Boothroyd A. & Medwetsky L. 1992. Spectral distribution of /s/ and the frequency response of hearing aids. Ear Hear, 13, 150–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boretzki M. & Kegal A. 2009. The benefits of nonlinear frequency compression for people with mild hearing loss. Audiology Online November, retrieved from: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/benefits-nonlinear-frequency-compression-for-869-869 , accessed June 10, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H., Ching T., Katsch R. & Keidser G. 2001. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: Characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 37–51.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chalupper J., Powers T.A. & Steinbuss A. 2011. Combining phase cancellation, frequency shifting, and acoustic fingerprint for improved feedback suppression. Hearing Review, 18, 24–29.
   Google Scholar
• Cox R., Alexander G. & Gilmore C. 1987. Development of the connected speech test (CST). Ear Hear, 8, 119s–126s.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R., Alexander G., Gilmore C. & Pusakulich K. 1988. Use of the connected speech test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear, 9, 198–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R., Alexander G., Taylor I. & Gray G. 1996. Benefit acclimatization in elderly hearing-aid users. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 428.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellis R.J. & Munro K.J. 2013. Does cognitive function predict frequency compressed speech recognition in listeners with normal hearing and normal cognition? Int J Audiol, 52, 14–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glista D. & Scollie S. 2012. Development and evaluation of an English language measure of detection of word-final plurality markers: The University of Western Ontario Plurals Test. Am J Audiol, 21, 76–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glista D., Scollie S., Bagatto M., Seewald R., Parsa V. et al. 2009. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: Clinical outcomes. Int J Audiol, 48, 632–644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glista D., Scollie S. & Sulkers J. 2012. Perceptual acclimatization post nonlinear frequency compression hearing aid fitting in older children. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 55, 1765–1787.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helfer K.S. & Wilber L.A. 1990. Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 33, 149–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kochkin S. 2005. MarkeTrak VII: Customer satisfaction with hearing aids in the digital age. Hearing Journal, 58, 30–39.
   Google Scholar
• Kuk F., Lau C.-C., Korhonen P., Crose B., Peeters H. et al. 2010. Development of the ORCA nonsense syllable test. Ear Hear, 31, 779–795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCreery R.W., Brennan M.A., Hoover B., Kopun J. & Stelmachowicz P.G. 2013. Maximizing audibility and speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression by estimating audible bandwidth. Ear Hear, 34, e24–e27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDermott H.J. 2011. A technical comparison of digital frequency-lowering algorithms available in two current hearing aids. PLoS One, 6, e22358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsa V., Scollie S., Glista D. & Seelisch A. 2013. Nonlinear frequency compression effects on sound quality ratings of speech and music. Trends Amplif, 17, 54–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pittman A.L. & Stelmachowicz P.G. 2000. Perception of voiceless fricatives by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children and adults. J Sp Lang Hear Res, 43, 1389–1401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittman A.L., Stelmachowicz P.G., Lewis D.E. & Hoover B.M. 2003. Spectral characteristics of speech at the ear: Implications for amplification in children. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 46, 649–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. 1986. A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. J Speech Hear Res, 29, 146–154.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sakamoto S., Goto K., Tateno M. & Kaga K. 2000. Frequency compression hearing aid for severe-to-profound hearing impairments. Auris Nasus Larynx, 27, 327–334.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saunders G.H. & Cienkowski K.M. 1997. Acclimatization to hearing aids. Ear Hear, 18, 129–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson A., Hersbach A.A. & McDermott H.J. 2005. Improvements in speech perception with an experimental nonlinear frequency compression hearing device. Int J Audiol, 44, 281–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson A., Hersbach A.A. & Mcdermott H.J. 2006. Frequency- compression outcomes in listeners with steeply sloping audiograms. Int J Audiol, 45, 619–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza P., Arehart K., Kates J., Croghan N. & Gehani N. 2013. Exploring the limits of frequency lowering. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 56, 1349–1363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Studebaker G.A. 1985. A “rationalized” arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res, 28, 455–462.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Teie P. 2012. Clinical experience with, and real-world effectiveness of, frequency-lowering technology for adults in select US clinics. Hearing Review, 19, 34–39.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe J., John A., Schafer E., Nyffeler M., Boretzki M. et al. 2011. Long-term effects of non-linear frequency compression for children with moderate hearing loss. Int J Audiol, 50, 396–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav N., Kumar S., Annapurna S. & Vinila V.J. 2011. The effect of stimulus bandwidth on perception of fricative /s/ among individuals with different degrees of sensorineural hearing loss. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1, 1679–1687.
   Google Scholar
• Yund E.W., Roup C.M., Simon H.J. & Bowman G.A. 2006. Acclimatization in wide dynamic range multichannel compression and linear amplification hearing aids. J Rehabil Res Dev, 43, 517.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar