| Author(s) |
Anoop Basavanahalli Jagadeesh Ajith Kumar Uppunda |
| Volume | 45 |
| Number | 2 |
| Year | 2021 |
| Page(s) | 143-156 |
| Language | English |
| Category | Research Article |
| Keywords |
Linguistic masking Informational masking Speech-on-speech Listening effort Subjective rating |
| Abstract |
The current study measured speech recognition and subjective listening effort scores while systematically varying the amount of linguistic information in maskers. Linguistic information in the maskers was varied by (a) increasing the number of speakers in the speech babble maskers and (b) time-reversing them. In Experiment 1, we measured speech recognition performance (signal-tonoise ratios required for 50% accuracy of sentences) for 16 participants. The speech (sentences) recognition scores were obtained in 15 background conditions: speech babble maskers with 2 to 8 speakers (7 conditions), time-reversed babble maskers (7 conditions), and a speech-spectrum noise. For Experiment 2, another 15 participants rated the effort (7-point rating scale) required to understand sentences in the same maskers as Experiment 1. This was done at a signal-to-noise ratio of 0 dB. Results showed that fewer speakers in the babble maskers (a) caused the greatest masking effects and (b) required the greatest listening effort ratings. Speech babble maskers resulted in significantly higher masking effects than reverse babble maskers only for the 2- and 3-speaker babble conditions. However, the listening effort scores were substantially higher for the speech babble maskers than reverse babble maskers in most of the conditions. Results suggest that both magnitudes of masking and the listening effort scores are related to the linguistic information in the masker. Dans la pr sente tude, les scores de reconnaissance de stimuli verbaux et d’effort l’ coute ont t mesur s en variant syst matiquement la quantit d’information linguistique contenue dans des bruits masquants. L’information contenue dans les bruits masquants a t modifi e en (a) augmentant le nombre d’interlocuteurs et (b) en inversant ces bruits. Dans l’exp rience 1, les scores de reconnaissance de la parole (rapport signal-sur-bruit permettant de comprendre 50% des phrases) de 16 participants ont t mesur s. Ceux-ci ont t obtenus dans 15 environnements bruyants : 7 bruits de verbiage qui incluaient de 2 8 interlocuteurs, ces 7 m mes bruits de verbiage invers s, de m me qu’un bruit spectre vocal. Dans l’exp rience 2, 15 autres participants ont not (sur une chelle de 7 points) l’effort qu’ils ont eu d ployer pour comprendre des phrases dans les m mes 15 environnements bruyants. Pour cette deuxi me exp rience, le rapport signal-sur-bruit tait de 0 dB. Les r sultats ont montr qu’un bruit de verbiage qui inclut moins d’interlocuteurs (a) cause un effet masquant plus important et (b) g n re des scores d’effort l’ coute plus lev s. Les bruits de verbiage ont conduit un effet masquant plus important que les bruits de verbiage invers s, et ce, seulement lorsqu’ils contenaient de 2 3 interlocuteurs. Toutefois, les scores d’effort l’ coute taient consid rablement plus lev s pour les bruits de verbiage que pour les bruits de verbiage invers s, et ce, dans la majorit des environnements bruyants. Les r sultats sugg rent que les scores de reconnaissance de stimuli verbaux et d’effort l’ coute sont associ s la quantit d’information linguistique contenue dans un bruit masquant. |
| Record ID | 1279 |
| Link | https://cjslpa.ca/files/2021_CJSLPA_Vol_45/No_2/CJSLPA_Vol_45_No_2_2021_1225.pdf |
CJSLPA is an open access journal which means that all articles are available on the Internet to all users immediately upon publication. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose.
CJSLPA does not charge authors publication or processing fees.
Copyright of the Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology is held by Speech-Language and Audiology Canada (SAC). Appropriate credit must be given (SAC, publication name, article title, volume number, issue number and page number[s]) but not in any way that suggests SAC endorses you or your use of the work. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
Read