Temporal Cues and the Effect of Their Enhancement on Speech Perception in Older Adults - A Scoping Review

Overview

Journal J Otol

Date 2018 Jun 26

PMID 29937817

Citations 1

Authors

Hemanth Narayan Shetty

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Temporal envelope is a low frequency amplitude modulation conveying segmental and suprasegmental information during speech perception. Unfortunately, we seldom find ourselves in completely quiet listening environments and noise, commonly found in the surrounding environment, obscures both the fine structure cues and partly the temporal envelope cues in speech. Available temporal content of speech emanating from noise is often enough to convey required information in normal hearing individuals. However, the case is different in older adults (with and without hearing loss) who lack such capabilities due to the impairment in temporal processing. This calls attention of a researcher to delineate the importance of temporal enhancement of speech in improving speech perception. There are many temporal envelope strategies available in the literature, but each one has its own lacunae. An envelope enhancement by a deep band modulation (DBM) is found to be beneficial for those individuals who have had a temporal processing impairment. The reason could be attributed to the 15 dB enhancement in the temporal envelope bandwidth between 3 and 30 Hz, extracted from each channel, which significantly increases the modulation depth such that masking of a consonant by a vowel is minimized. Additionally, output of deep band modulated speech is rescaled such that its duration increases and it provides relatively easy access to the word of the lexicon. Thus, in the near future, with more experiments related to DBM algorithm, it can be utilized in the rehabilitative devices to lessen the impact of the temporal processing impairment.

Citing Articles

Does Amplitude Compression Help or Hinder Attentional Neural Speech Tracking?.

Orf M, Hannemann R, Obleser J J Neurosci. 2025; 45(11).

PMID: 39843232 PMC: 11905343. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0238-24.2024.

Brainstem correlates of concurrent speech identification in adverse listening conditions.

Yellamsetty A, Bidelman G Brain Res. 2019; 1714:182-192.

PMID: 30796895 PMC: 6727209. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2019.02.025.

References

Freyman R, Nerbonne G . Consonant confusions in amplitude-expanded speech. J Speech Hear Res. 1996; 39(6):1124-37. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3906.1124. View

Moore B, Glasberg B . Factors affecting thresholds for sinusoidal signals in narrow-band maskers with fluctuating envelopes. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987; 82(1):69-79. DOI: 10.1121/1.395439. View

Moore B, Shailer M . Comodulation masking release as a function of level. J Acoust Soc Am. 1991; 90(2 Pt 1):829-35. DOI: 10.1121/1.401950. View

Schneider B, Pichora-Fuller M, Kowalchuk D, Lamb M . Gap detection and the precedence effect in young and old adults. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 95(2):980-91. DOI: 10.1121/1.408403. View

Veloso K, Hall 3rd J, Grose J . Frequency selectivity and comodulation masking release in adults and in 6-year-old children. J Speech Hear Res. 1990; 33(1):96-102. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3301.96. View

Hall 3rd J, Grose J . Some effects of auditory grouping factors on modulation detection interference (MDI). J Acoust Soc Am. 1991; 90(6):3028-35. DOI: 10.1121/1.401777. View

Shannon R, Zeng F, Kamath V, Wygonski J, Ekelid M . Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science. 1995; 270(5234):303-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.270.5234.303. View

Lorenzi C, Berthommier F, Apoux F, Bacri N . Effects of envelope expansion on speech recognition. Hear Res. 1999; 136(1-2):131-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-5955(99)00117-3. View

Stuart A, Phillips D . Word recognition in continuous and interrupted broadband noise by young normal-hearing, older normal-hearing, and presbyacusic listeners. Ear Hear. 1996; 17(6):478-89. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199612000-00004. View

10.

Carlyon R, Buus S, Florentine M . Comodulation masking release for three types of modulator as a function of modulation rate. Hear Res. 1989; 42(1):37-45. DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(89)90116-0. View

11.

Duquesnoy A, PLOMP R . Effect of reverberation and noise on the intelligibility of sentences in cases of presbyacusis. J Acoust Soc Am. 1980; 68(2):537-44. DOI: 10.1121/1.384767. View

12.

Hopkins K, Moore B . The effects of age and cochlear hearing loss on temporal fine structure sensitivity, frequency selectivity, and speech reception in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011; 130(1):334-49. DOI: 10.1121/1.3585848. View

13.

Nagarajan S, Wang X, Merzenich M, Schreiner C, Johnston P, Jenkins W . Speech modifications algorithms used for training language learning-impaired children. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1998; 6(3):257-68. DOI: 10.1109/86.712220. View

14.

Clarkson P, Bahgat S . Envelope expansion methods for speech enhancement. J Acoust Soc Am. 1991; 89(3):1378-82. DOI: 10.1121/1.400538. View

15.

Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons P . Temporal factors and speech recognition performance in young and elderly listeners. J Speech Hear Res. 1993; 36(6):1276-85. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3606.1276. View

16.

Ezzatian P, Li L, Pichora-Fuller K, Schneider B . The effect of priming on release from informational masking is equivalent for younger and older adults. Ear Hear. 2010; 32(1):84-96. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181ee6b8a. View

17.

Peters R, Moore B, Baer T . Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 103(1):577-87. DOI: 10.1121/1.421128. View

18.

Souza P, Turner C . Masking of speech in young and elderly listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37(3):655-61. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3703.655. View

19.

Festen J, PLOMP R . Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990; 88(4):1725-36. DOI: 10.1121/1.400247. View

20.

Grose J, Mamo S, Hall 3rd J . Age effects in temporal envelope processing: speech unmasking and auditory steady state responses. Ear Hear. 2009; 30(5):568-75. PMC: 2739408. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181ac128f. View