Design and Development of a Spanish Hearing Test for Speech in Noise (PAHRE)

Overview

Journal Audiol Res

Publisher MDPI

Specialty Otorhinolaryngology

Date 2023 Jan 17

PMID 36648925

Authors

Marlene Rodriguez-Ferreiro

Montserrat Duran-Bouza

Victoria Marrero-Aguiar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: There are few hearing tests in Spanish that assess speech discrimination in noise in the adult population that take into account the Lombard effect. This study presents the design and development of a Spanish hearing test for speech in noise (Prueba Auditiva de Habla en Ruido en Español (PAHRE) in Spanish). The pattern of the Quick Speech in Noise test was followed when drafting sentences with five key words each grouped in lists of six sentences. It was necessary to take into account the differences between English and Spanish.

Methods: A total of 61 people (24 men and 37 women) with an average age of 46.9 (range 18-84 years) participated in the study. The work was carried out in two phases. In the first phase, a list of Spanish sentences was drafted and subjected to a familiarity test based on the semantic and syntactic characteristics of the sentences; as a result, a list of sentences was selected for the final test. In the second phase, the selected sentences were recorded with and without the Lombard effect, the equivalence between both lists was analysed, and the test was applied to a first reference population.

Results: The results obtained allow us to affirm that it is representative of the Spanish spoken in its variety in peninsular Spain.

Conclusions: In addition, these results point to the usefulness of the PAHRE test in assessing speech in noise by maintaining a fixed speech intensity while varying the intensity of the multi-speaker background noise. The incorporation of the Lombard effect in the test shows discrimination differences with the same signal-to-noise ratio compared to the test without the Lombard effect.

Citing Articles

Analysis of the Spanish Auditory Test of Speech in Noise (PAHRE) in a Population with Hearing Loss.

Rodriguez-Ferreiro M, Duran-Bouza M, Marrero-Aguiar V Audiol Res. 2024; 14(5):861-874.

PMID: 39452465 PMC: 11505354. DOI: 10.3390/audiolres14050073.

References

Summers W, Johnson K, Pisoni D, Bernacki R . An addendum to "Effects of Noise on Speech Production: Acoustic and Perceptual Analyses" [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 84, 917-928 (1988)]. J Acoust Soc Am. 1989; 86(5):1717-21. PMC: 3521161. DOI: 10.1121/1.398602. View

Killion M, Niquette P, Gudmundsen G, Revit L, Banerjee S . Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004; 116(4 Pt 1):2395-405. DOI: 10.1121/1.1784440. View

Luo J, Hage S, Moss C . The Lombard Effect: From Acoustics to Neural Mechanisms. Trends Neurosci. 2018; 41(12):938-949. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2018.07.011. View

Smits C, Kapteyn T, Houtgast T . Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol. 2004; 43(1):15-28. DOI: 10.1080/14992020400050004. View

Davidson A, Marrone N, Souza P . Hearing Aid Technology Settings and Speech-in-Noise Difficulties. Am J Audiol. 2022; 31(1):21-31. PMC: 9128736. DOI: 10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00176. View

Wilson R, McArdle R, Smith S . An Evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN Materials on Listeners With Normal Hearing and Listeners With Hearing Loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007; 50(4):844-56. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/059). View

Stowe L, Golob E . Evidence that the Lombard effect is frequency-specific in humans. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013; 134(1):640-7. PMC: 3985863. DOI: 10.1121/1.4807645. View

Nilsson M, Soli S, Sullivan J . Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 95(2):1085-99. DOI: 10.1121/1.408469. View

CARHART R, TILLMAN T . Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Arch Otolaryngol. 1970; 91(3):273-9. DOI: 10.1001/archotol.1970.00770040379010. View

10.

Vermiglio A, Soli S, Freed D, Fisher L . The relationship between high-frequency pure-tone hearing loss, hearing in noise test (HINT) thresholds, and the articulation index. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012; 23(10):779-88. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.23.10.4. View

11.

Shi L, Doherty K, Kordas T, Pellegrino J . Short-term and long-term hearing aid benefit and user satisfaction: a comparison between two fitting protocols. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007; 18(6):482-95. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18.6.3. View

12.

Bosker H, Cooke M . Enhanced amplitude modulations contribute to the Lombard intelligibility benefit: Evidence from the Nijmegen Corpus of Lombard Speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 2020; 147(2):721. DOI: 10.1121/10.0000646. View

13.

Junqua J . The Lombard reflex and its role on human listeners and automatic speech recognizers. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993; 93(1):510-24. DOI: 10.1121/1.405631. View

14.

Stropahl M, Besser J, Launer S . Auditory Training Supports Auditory Rehabilitation: A State-of-the-Art Review. Ear Hear. 2019; 41(4):697-704. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000806. View

15.

Villchur E . Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. J Acoust Soc Am. 1973; 53(6):1646-57. DOI: 10.1121/1.1913514. View

16.

Leclercq F, Renard C, Vincent C . Speech audiometry in noise: Development of the French-language VRB (vocale rapide dans le bruit) test. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2018; 135(5):315-319. DOI: 10.1016/j.anorl.2018.07.002. View

17.

Akeroyd M . Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol. 2008; 47 Suppl 2:S53-71. DOI: 10.1080/14992020802301142. View

18.

Kalikow D, Stevens K, Elliott L . Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977; 61(5):1337-51. DOI: 10.1121/1.381436. View

19.

Patel R, Schell K . The influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51(1):209-20. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/016). View

20.

Pittman A, Wiley T . Recognition of speech produced in noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001; 44(3):487-96. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/038). View