Level discrimination of speech sounds by hearing-impaired individuals with and without hearing amplification

Objectives: The current study was designed to see how hearing-impaired individuals judge level differences between speech sounds with and without hearing amplification. It was hypothesized that hearing aid compression should adversely affect the user's ability to judge level differences. Design: Thirty-eight hearing-impaired participants performed an adaptive tracking procedure to determine their level-discrimination thresholds for different word and sentence tokens, as well as speech-spectrum noise, with and without their hearing aids. Eight normal-hearing participants performed the same task for comparison. Results: Level discrimination for different word and sentence tokens was more difficult than the discrimination of stationary noises. Word level discrimination was significantly more difficult than sentence level discrimination. There were no significant differences, however, between mean performance with and without hearing aids and no correlations between performance and various hearing aid measurements. Conclusions: There is a clear difficulty in judging the level differences between words or sentences relative to differences between broadband noises, but this difficulty was found for both hearing-impaired and normal-hearing individuals and had no relation to hearing aid compression measures. The lack of a clear adverse effect of hearing aid compression on level discrimination is suggested to be due to the low effective compression ratios of currently fit hearing aids

Estimates of the number of adults in England, Wales, and Scotland with a hearing loss

No abstract available

The Sensitivity of Hearing-Impaired Adults to Acoustic Attributes in Simulated Rooms

In previous studies we have shown that older hearing-impaired individuals are relatively insensitive to changes in the apparent width of broadband noises when those width changes were based on differences in interaural coherence [W. Whitmer, B. Seeber and M. Akeroyd, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132, 369-379 (2012)]. This insensitivity has been linked to senescent difficulties in resolving binaural fine-structure differences. It is therefore possible that interaural coherence, despite its widespread use, may not be the best acoustic surrogate of spatial perception for the aged and impaired. To test this, we simulated the room impulse responses for various acoustic scenarios with differing coherence and lateral (energy) fraction attributes using room modelling software (ODEON). Bilaterally impaired adult participants were asked to sketch the perceived size of speech tokens and musical excerpts that were convolved with these impulse responses and presented to them in a sound-dampened enclosure through a 24-loudspeaker array. Participants' binaural acuity was also measured using an interaural phase discrimination task. Corroborating our previous findings, the results showed less sensitivity to interaural coherence in the auditory source width judgments of older hearing-impaired individuals, indicating that alternate acoustic measurements in the design of spaces for the elderly may be necessary

Recording and Analysis of Head Movements, Interaural Level and Time Differences in Rooms and Real-World Listening Scenarios

The science of how we use interaural differences to localise sounds has been studied for over a century and in many ways is well understood. But in many of these psychophysical experiments listeners are required to keep their head still, as head movements cause changes in interaural level and time differences (ILD and ITD respectively). But a fixed head is unrealistic. Here we report an analysis of the actual ILDs and ITDs that occur as people naturally move and relate them to gyroscope measurements of the actual motion. We used recordings of binaural signals in a number of rooms and listening scenarios (home, office, busy street etc). The listener's head movements were also recorded in synchrony with the audio, using a micro-electromechanical gyroscope. We calculated the instantaneous ILD and ITDs and analysed them over time and frequency, comparing them with measurements of head movements. The results showed that instantaneous ITDs were widely distributed across time and frequency in some multi-source environments while ILDs were less widely distributed. The type of listening environment affected head motion. These findings suggest a complex interaction between interaural cues, egocentric head movement and the identification of sound sources in real-world listening situations

Measuring vowel percepts in human listeners with behavioral response-triggered averaging

A vowel can be largely defined by the frequencies of its first two formants, but the absolute frequencies for a given vowel vary from talker to talker and utterance to utterance. Given this variability, it is unclear what criteria listeners use to identify vowels. To estimate the vowel features for which people listen, we adapted a noise-based reverse-correlation method from auditory neurophysiological studies and vision research (Gold et al., 1999). Listeners presented with the stimulus, which had a random spectrum with levels in 60 frequency bins changing every 0.5 s, were asked to press a key whenever they heard the vowels [a] or [i:]. Reverse-correlation was used to average the spectrum of the noise prior to each key press, thus estimating the features of the vowels for which the participants were listening. The formant frequencies of these reverse-correlated vowels were similar to those of their respective whispered vowels. The success of this response-triggered technique suggests that it may prove useful for estimating other internal representations, including perceptual phenomena like tinnitus. References: Gold, J., Bennett, P. J., and Sekuler, A. B. (1999). “Identification of band-pass filtered faces and letters by human and ideal observers,” Vis. Res. 39(21), 3537–3560

A comprehensive survey of hearing questionnaires: how many are there, what do they measure, and how have they been validated?

The self-report questionnaire is a popular tool for measuring outcomes in trials of interventions for hearing impairment. Many have been designed over the last fifty years, and there is no single standard questionnaire that is widely accepted and used. We felt it would be a valuable resource to have a comprehensive collection of all adult hearing-loss questionnaires (excluding those wholly devoted to tinnitus, children, or cochlear implants) and to survey their degree of validation. We collated copies of every published hearing difficulty questionnaire that we could find. The search was primarily done by iterative reference searching. Questionnaire topics were obtained by mapping the text of each questionnaire onto a set of categories; reports of validation methods were taken from the primary paper(s) on each questionnaire. In total we found 139 hearing-specific questionnaires (though many others were found that were primarily about something else). Though not formally systematic, we believe that we have included every questionnaire that is important, most of those of some notice, and a fair fraction of those obscure. We classified 111 as “primary” and the remaining 28 as “contractions”, being shortened versions of a primary without any new questions. In total, there were 3618 items across all the primary questionnaires. The median number of items per questionnaire was 20; the maximum was 158. Across all items, about one third were concerned with the person’s own hearing, another third with the repercussions of it, and about a quarter with hearing aids. There was a wide range in validation methods, from only using items chosen statistically from wider pools and with formal validation against independent measures of clinical outcomes, to just reporting a correlation with an audiogram measure of hearing loss. The “state of play” of the field of hearing questionnaires will be discussed

The internal representation of vowel spectra investigated using behavioral response-triggered averaging

Listeners presented with noise were asked to press a key 13 whenever they heard the vowels [a] or [i:]. The noise had a random spectrum, with levels in 60 frequency bins changing every 0.5 s. Reverse correlation was used to average the spectrum of the noise prior to each key press, thus estimating the features of the vowels for which the participants were listening. The formant frequencies of these reverse-correlated vowels were similar to those of their respective whispered vowels. The success of this response-triggered technique suggests that it may prove useful for estimating other internal representations, including perceptual phenomena like tinnitus

Domains relating to the everyday impact of hearing loss, as reported by patients or their communication partner(s): protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is a highly prevalent condition that affects around 1 in 6 people in the UK alone. This number is predicted to rise by the year 2031 to a staggering 14.5 million people due to the ageing population of the UK. Currently, the most common intervention for hearing loss is amplification with hearing aid(s) which serve to address the issue of audibility due to hearing loss, but cannot reverse its effects. The consequences of hearing loss are multifaceted, as it is a complex condition that can detrimentally affect various aspects of an individual's life, including communication and personal relationships. The scope of these reported issues is so broad that it calls on the need for patient-centred management plans that are tailored to each patient as well as appropriate measures to assess intervention benefit. It is unclear whether current outcome instruments adequately match what patients report as the most important problems for them. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The systematic review aims to capture existing knowledge about patients and their communication partner's perspective on the everyday impact of hearing loss. Methods are defined according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses for Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical issues are foreseen. Findings will be reported in student's thesis as well as at national and international ENT/audiology conferences and in a peer-reviewed journal. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42015024914

Associations between hearing and cognitive abilities from childhood to middle age:The National Child Development Study 1958

Previous cross-sectional findings indicate that hearing and cognitive abilities are positively correlated in childhood, adulthood, and older age. We used an unusually valuable longitudinal dataset from a single-year birth cohort study, the National Child Development Study 1958, to test how hearing and cognitive abilities relate to one another across the life course from childhood to middle age. Cognitive ability was assessed with a single test of general cognitive ability at age 11 years and again with multiple tests at age 50. Hearing ability was assessed, using a pure tone audiogram, in childhood at ages 11 and 16 and again at age 44. Associations between childhood and middle-age hearing and cognitive abilities were investigated using structural equation modelling. We found that higher cognitive ability was associated with better hearing (indicated by a lower score on the hearing ability variables); this association was apparent in childhood (r  =  -0.120, p [less than]0.001) and middle age (r  =  -0.208, p [less than]0.001). There was a reciprocal relationship between hearing and cognitive abilities over time: better hearing in childhood was weakly associated with a higher cognitive ability in middle age (β  =  -0.076, p  =  0.001), and a higher cognitive ability in childhood was associated with better hearing in middle age (β  =  -0.163,

Longitudinal associations between hearing loss and general cognitive ability:The Lothian Birth Cohort 1936

Hearing impairment is associated with poorer cognitive function in later life. We tested for the potential contribution of childhood cognitive ability to this relationship. Childhood cognitive ability is strongly related to cognitive function in older age, and may be related to auditory function through its association with hearing impairment risk factors. Using data from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936, we tested whether childhood cognitive ability predicted later-life hearing ability then whether this association was mediated by demographic or health differences. We found that childhood cognitive ability was negatively associated with hearing impairment risk at age 76 (odds ratio = .834, p = .042). However, this association was non-significant following subsequent adjustment for potentially mediating demographic and health factors. Next, we tested whether associations observed in older age between hearing impairment and general cognitive ability level or change were accounted for by childhood cognitive ability. At age 76, in the minimally adjusted model, hearing impairment was associated with poorer general cognitive ability level (β = -.119, p = .030) but was not related to decline in general cognitive ability. The former association became non-significant following additional adjustment for childhood cognitive ability (β = -.068; p = .426) suggesting that childhood cognitive ability contributes (potentially via demographic and health differences) to the association between levels of hearing and cognitive function in older age. Further work is needed to test whether early-life cognitive ability also contributes to the association (documented in previous studies) between older-age hearing impairment and cognitive decline