JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Speech and Hearing Research Vol.34 904-915 August 1991.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cox, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Rivera, I. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cox, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Rivera, I. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Comparison of Objective and Subjective Measures of Speech Intelligibility in Elderly Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Robyn M. Cox 1
Genevieve C. Alexander 2

Izel M. Rivera 2
1 Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology Memphis State University, and Veteran's Admmlstration Medical Center Memphis, TN
2 Veteran's Administration Medical Center Memphis, TN

Three experiments were performed to evaluate the use of subjective intelligibility estimations as a method for measuring hearing aid benefit. Subjective and objective speech intelligibility scores were compared for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners. Objective intelligibility scores were obtained using the Connected Speech Test (CST). This test consists of conversationally produced passages of speech that the listener repeats sentence by sentence. To provide subjective intelligibility scores, listeners estimated the percentage that they understood of each CST passage. Comparison of the two types of scores revealed that they were closely related in both groups of subjects (r=82–92). Although the two types of scores were essentially equal for normal-hearing subjects, the hearing-impaired listeners tended to produce subjective estimations of intelligibility that were significantly lower than their objective scores. Manipulation of visual cues and amplification, In an attempt to influence the hearing-impaired listeners' expectation of understanding speech, had no effect on the subjectiveobjective score differential. The difference between subjective and objective scores in the hearing-impaired group was not related to audiometric variables such as speech reception threshold, audiogram, or duration of hearing loss. It was concluded that comparative hearing aid evaluations using subjective intelligibility estimates would usually produce the same relative outcome as evaluations using the objective intelligibility measurement procedure. However, scores obtained with the objective procedure had smaller critical differences. Thus, when both types of scores are based on the same number of passages, the objective measurement procedure would be the more sensitive to differences among hearing aids.

KEY WORDS: hearing aid, speech intelligibility, subjective measures

Submitted on March 30, 1990
Accepted on October 11, 1990


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.