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


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.50 15-24 February 2007. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/002)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Plyler, P. N.
Right arrow Articles by Trine, T. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Plyler, P. N.
Right arrow Articles by Trine, T. D.
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?

The Objective and Subjective Evaluation of Multichannel Expansion in Wide Dynamic Range Compression Hearing Instruments

Patrick N. Plyler
Kristy J. Lowery
Hilary M. Hamby
University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Timothy D. Trine
Starkey Laboratories, Inc., Eden Prairie, MN

Contact author: Patrick N. Plyler, Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, University of Tennessee, 578 South Stadium Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-0740. E-mail: pplyler{at}utk.edu.

Purpose: The effects of multichannel expansion on the objective and subjective evaluation of 20 listeners fitted binaurally with 4-channel, digital in-the-ear hearing instruments were investigated.

Method: Objective evaluations were conducted in quiet using the Connected Speech Test (CST) and in noise using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) at 40, 50, and 60 dB SPL. Subjective evaluations were conducted by having each participant (a) rate their satisfaction regarding the amount of noise reduction they perceived daily and (b) indicate which expansion condition they preferred overall after a 2-week trial. Three expansion settings were programmed into the hearing aids: 4-channel expansion, expansion restricted to Channels 1 and 2 only, and expansion off.

Results: Listeners performed significantly better in quiet (CST) and in noise (HINT) for the off condition than for either multichannel condition; however, restricting expansion to Channels 1 and 2 improved objective performance in quiet and in noise relative to the 4-channel condition. Conversely, satisfaction ratings were significantly greater for both multichannel conditions than for the off condition; however, satisfaction ratings were similar for the restricted and the 4-channel conditions. Overall, listeners preferred any form of multichannel expansion to no expansion; however, overall preference was similar for the restricted and the 4-channel conditions.

Conclusions: Hearing instrument users prefer the use of multichannel expansion despite the fact multichannel expansion may significantly reduce the recognition of low-level speech in quiet and in noise. Although restricting expansion to Channels 1 and 2 (i.e., 2000 Hz and below) maintained subjective benefit for wide dynamic range compression hearing instrument users, the recognition of low-level speech was not completely preserved.

KEY WORDS: expansion, compression


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 © 2007 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.