Auditory and Vestibular Research 2018. 27(3):.

The relationship between the intensity levels and speech production fluency in the delayed auditory feedback test in normally hearing listeners
Sayyed Hossein Hosseini, Sayyed Ali Akbar Tahaei, Nariman Rahbar

Abstract


Background and Aim: Sometimes people with functional hearing loss are referred to audiology clinics. The delayed auditory feedback (DAF) is a test which assesses functional hearing loss qualitatively. This study aimed to quantify DAF and accordingly use it in more precise way.
Methods: Fifteen normally hearing students participated in this experiment. Each person’s voice was presented to his or her ear once without and another time with fixed time delay when he or she was reading simple texts. The delayed voices were presented in different intensity levels. Stuttering, unusual lengthy, and non-fluent utterances indicated the perception and hearing of the delayed voices.
Results: The length of the utterances increased and the fluency of the utterances decreased significantly for delayed compared to non-delay condition and for different intensity levels.
Conclusion: These results showed that the levels of intensity of the delayed voices might inf­luence the perception of the delay.


Keywords


Delayed auditory feedback; non-organic hearing loss; speech fluency

References


Lin J, Staecker H. Nonorganic hearing loss. Semin Neurol. 2006;26(3):321-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-945518

Schmidt CM, Am Zehnhoff-Dinnesen A, Deuster D. [Nonorganic (functional) hearing loss in children]. HNO. 2013;61(2):136-41. German. doi: 10.1007/s00106-012-2504-3

Fredrick N. Martin. Nonorganic hearing loss. In: Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood LJ, Tillery KL, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 7th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2014. p. 617-29.

Mehta AK, Singh VK. Screening tests for nonorganic hearing loss. Med J Armed Forces India. 2000;56(1):79-81. doi: 10.1016/S0377-1237(17)30105-3

Durmaz A, Karahatay S, Satar B, Birkent H, Hidir Y. Efficiency of Stenger test in confirming profound, unilateral pseudohypacusis. J Laryngol Otol. 2009;123(8):840-4. doi: 10.1017/S0022215109004769

Psarommatis I, Kontorinis G, Kontrogiannis A, Douniadakis D, Tsakanikos M. Pseudohypacusis: the most frequent etiology of sudden hearing loss in children. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;266(12):1857-61. doi: 10.1007/s00405-009-0983-y

Baiduc RR, Poling GL, Hong O, Dhar S. Clinical measures of auditory function: the cochlea and beyond. Dis Mon. 2013;59(4):147-56. doi: 10.1016/j.disamonth.2013.01.005

Takaso H, Eisner F, Wise RJ, Scott SK. The effect of delayed auditory feedback on activity in the temporal lobe while speaking: a positron emission tomography study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010;53(2):226-36. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/09-0009)

Tiffany WR, Hanley CN. Delayed speech feedback as a test for auditory malingering. Science. 1952;115(2977):59-60. doi: 10.1126/science.115.2977.59

Chon H, Kraft SJ, Zhang J, Loucks T, Ambrose NG. Individual variability in delayed auditory feedback effects on speech fluency and rate in normally fluent adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013;56(2):489-504. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0303)

Zheng ZZ, Vicente-Grabovetsky A, MacDonald EN, Munhall KG, Cusack R, Johnsrude IS. Multivoxel patterns reveal functionally differentiated networks underlying auditory feedback processing of speech. J Neurosci. 2013;33(10):4339-48. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6319-11.2013

Stuart A, Kalinowski J. Effect of delayed auditory feedback, speech rate, and sex on speech production. Percept Mot Skills. 2015;120(3):747-65. doi: 10.2466/23.25.PMS.120v17x2

Daliri A, Max L. Modulation of auditory processing during speech movement planning is limited in adults who stutter. Brain Lang. 2015;143:59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2015.03.002

Rönnberg J, Hygge S, Keidser G, Rudner M. The effect of functional hearing loss and age on long- and short-term visuospatial memory: evidence from the UK biobank resource. Front Aging Neurosci. 2014;6:326. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00326

Maas E, Mailend ML, Guenther FH. Feedforward and feedback control in apraxia of speech: effects of noise masking on vowel production. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015;58(2):185-200. doi: 10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-13-0300

Kaspar K, Rübeling H. Rhythmic versus phonemic interference in delayed auditory feedback. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011;54(3):932-43. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0109)

Chesters J, Baghai-Ravary L, Möttönen R. The effects of delayed auditory and visual feedback on speech production. J Acoust Soc Am. 2015;137(2):873-83. doi: 10.1121/1.4906266


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.