2008The Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaRequires access

Speech recognition in noise as a function of highpass-filter cutoff frequency for people with and without low-frequency cochlear dead regions

Vinay, Thomas Baer, Brian C. J. Moore

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

Regions in the cochlea with very few functioning inner hair cells and/or neurons are called “dead regions” (DRs). Previously, we measured the recognition of highpass-filtered nonsense syllables as a function of filter cutoff frequency for hearing-impaired people with and without low-frequency (apical) DRs [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 542–553 (2007)]. DRs were diagnosed using the TEN(HL) test, and psychophysical tuning curves were used to define the edge frequency (fe) more precisely. Stimuli were amplified differently for each ear, using the “Cambridge formula.” The present study was similar, but the speech was presented in speech-shaped noise at a signal-to-noise ratio of 3dB. For subjects with low-frequency hearing loss but without DRs, scores were high (65–80%) for low cutoff frequencies and worsened with increasing cutoff frequency above about 430Hz. For subjects with low-frequency DRs, performance was poor (20–40%) for the lowest cutoff frequency, improved with increasing cutoff frequency up to about 0.56fe, and then worsened. As for speech in quiet, these results indicate that people with low-frequency DRs are able to make effective use of frequency components that fall in the range 0.56fe to fe, but that frequency components below 0.56fe have deleterious effects.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Regions in the cochlea with very few functioning inner hair cells and/or neurons are called “dead regions” (DRs). Previously, we measured the recognition of highpass-filtered nonsense syllables as a function of filter cutoff frequency for hearing-impaired people with and without low-frequency (apical) DRs [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 542–553 (2007)]. DRs were diagnosed using the TEN(HL) test, and psychophysical tuning curves were used to define the edge frequency (fe) more precisely. Stimuli were amplified differently for each ear, using the “Cambridge formula.” The present study was similar, but the speech was presented in speech-shaped noise at a signal-to-noise ratio of 3dB. For subjects with low-frequency hearing loss but without DRs, scores were high (65–80%) for low cutoff frequencies and worsened with increasing cutoff frequency above about 430Hz. For subjects with low-frequency DRs, performance was poor (20–40%) for the lowest cutoff frequency, improved with increasing cutoff frequency up to about 0.56fe, and then worsened. As for speech in quiet, these results indicate that people with low-frequency DRs are able to make effective use of frequency components that fall in the range 0.56fe to fe, but that frequency components below 0.56fe have deleterious effects.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Regions in the cochlea with very few functioning inner hair cells and/or neurons are called “dead regions” (DRs). Previously, we measured the recognition of highpass-filtered nonsense syllables as a function of filter cutoff frequency for hearing-impaired people with and without low-frequency (apical) DRs [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 542–553 (2007)]. DRs were diagnosed using the TEN(HL) test, and psychophysical tuning curves were used to define the edge frequency (fe) more precisely. Stimuli were amplified differently for each ear, using the “Cambridge formula.” The present study was similar, but the speech was presented in speech-shaped noise at a signal-to-noise ratio of 3dB. For subjects with low-frequency hearing loss but without DRs, scores were high (65–80%) for low cutoff frequencies and worsened with increasing cutoff frequency above about 430Hz. For subjects with low-frequency DRs, performance was poor (20–40%) for the lowest cutoff frequency, improved with increasing cutoff frequency up to about 0.56fe, and then worsened. As for speech in quiet, these results indicate that people with low-frequency DRs are able to make effective use of frequency components that fall in the range 0.56fe to fe, but that frequency components below 0.56fe have deleterious effects.

Key concepts: Cutoff, Cutoff frequency, High-pass filter, Low-pass filter, Acoustics, Cochlea, Audiology, Noise (video)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Speech recognition in noise as a function of highpass-filter cutoff frequency for people with and without low-frequency cochlear dead regions — Research Paper | ScholarLens