HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Shi, L.-F. Articles by Doherty, K. A. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shi, L.-F. Articles by Doherty, K. A.

Subjective and Objective Effects of Fast and Slow Compression on the Perception of Reverberant Speech in Listeners With Hearing Loss

Contact author: Lu-Feng Shi, who is now at the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Long Island University—Brooklyn Campus, Brooklyn, NY 11201. E-mail: lu.shi{at}liu.edu.

Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to assess the effect of fast and slow attack/release times (ATs/RTs) on aided perception of reverberant speech in quiet.

Method: Thirty listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss were tested monaurally with a commercial hearing aid programmed in 3 AT/RT settings: linear, fast (AT = 9 ms, RT = 90 ms), and slow (AT = 900 ms, RT = 1,500 ms). Stimuli consisted of 200 low-predictability Speech-Perception-in-Noise sentences, presented at 60 dB SPL at 4 reverberation levels (RT₆₀ = 0, 0.6, 1.2, and 3.6 s). Listeners were randomly presented with 12 listening conditions (3 AT/RT settings x 4 reverberation levels). Intelligibility scores and clarity ratings of the sentences were obtained.

Results: Aided speech intelligibility and clarity significantly decreased as reverberation increased. Both fast and slow ATs/RTs resulted in significantly higher speech intelligibility than linear, but no significant difference was observed between fast and slow ATs/RTs. Clarity rating was similar across 3 settings; however, rating decreased the fastest with fast AT/RT as reverberation increased. Slow AT/RT resulted in significantly higher real-ear aided response than fast AT/RT and linear, despite the same programmed gain for all settings.

Conclusion: Reverberation had a more significant effect on aided speech perception than AT/RT, but fast and slow AT/RT resulted in improved speech intelligibility over linear amplification.

KEY WORDS: hearing aids, dynamic compression, reverberation, speech perception