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


     


Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.46 636-648 June 2003. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2003/050)
© 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hedrick, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Younger, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hedrick, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Younger, M. S.
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?

Labeling of /s/ and /int/ by Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing, Revisited

Mark S. Hedrick 1
Mary Sue Younger 1

1 University of Tennessee, Knoxville

mhedric1{at}utk.edu

The two aims of this study were (a) to determine the perceptual weight given formant transition and relative amplitude information for labeling fricative place of articulation perception and (b) to determine the extent of integration of relative amplitude and formant transition cues. Seven listeners with normal hearing and 7 listeners with sensorineural hearing loss participated. The listeners were asked to label the fricatives of synthetic consonant-vowel stimuli as either /s/ or /int/. Across the stimuli, 3 cues were varied: (a) The amplitude of the spectral peak in the 2500- Hz range of the frication relative to the adjacent vowel peak amplitude in the same frequency region, (b) the frication duration, which was either 50 or 140 ms, and (c) the second formant transition onset frequency, which was varied from 1200 to 1800 Hz. An analysis of variance model was used to determine weightings for the relative amplitude and transition cues for the different frication duration conditions. A 30-ms gap of silence was inserted between the frication and vocalic portions of the stimuli, with the intent that a temporal separation of frication and transition information might affect how the cues were integrated. The weighting given transition or relative amplitude differed between the listening groups and depended on frication duration. Use of the transition cue was most affected by insertion of the silent gap. Listeners with hearing loss had smaller interaction terms for the cues than listeners with normal hearing, suggesting less integration of cues.

KEY WORDS: speech perception, sensorineural hearing loss, cue weighting, consonant perception, fricative perception

Submitted on April 2, 2002
Accepted on December 13, 2002


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?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JSLHRHome page
M. S. Hedrick and M. S. Younger
Perceptual Weighting of Stop Consonant Cues by Normal and Impaired Listeners in Reverberation Versus Noise
J Speech Lang Hear Res, April 1, 2007; 50(2): 254 - 269.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JSLHRHome page
P. E. Souza and K. T. Boike
Combining temporal-envelope cues across channels: effects of age and hearing loss.
J Speech Lang Hear Res, February 1, 2006; 49(1): 138 - 149.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.