These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of single-microphone noise reduction schemes: can hearing impaired listeners tell the difference?
    Author: Huber R, Bisitz T, Gerkmann T, Kiessling J, Meister H, Kollmeier B.
    Journal: Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S55-S61. PubMed ID: 28112001.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The perceived qualities of nine different single-microphone noise reduction (SMNR) algorithms were to be evaluated and compared in subjective listening tests with normal hearing and hearing impaired (HI) listeners. DESIGN: Speech samples added with traffic noise or with party noise were processed by the SMNR algorithms. Subjects rated the amount of speech distortions, intrusiveness of background noise, listening effort and overall quality, using a simplified MUSHRA (ITU-R, 2003 ) assessment method. STUDY SAMPLE: 18 normal hearing and 18 moderately HI subjects participated in the study. RESULTS: Significant differences between the rating behaviours of the two subject groups were observed: While normal hearing subjects clearly differentiated between different SMNR algorithms, HI subjects rated all processed signals very similarly. Moreover, HI subjects rated speech distortions of the unprocessed, noisier signals as being more severe than the distortions of the processed signals, in contrast to normal hearing subjects. CONCLUSIONS: It seems harder for HI listeners to distinguish between additive noise and speech distortions or/and they might have a different understanding of the term "speech distortion" than normal hearing listeners have. The findings confirm that the evaluation of SMNR schemes for hearing aids should always involve HI listeners.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]