Acceptable noise levels in Arabic-Persian bilinguals
AbstractBackground and Aim: Acceptable noise level (ANL) test is a reliable measure of people’s ability to tolerate background noise. Central nervous system is one of the determinant factors in subject’s tolerance of noise. Bilinguals’ different central activity pattern may yield different ANL test results from monolinguals. This study aims to compare noise tolerance function in Arabic-Persian bilinguals with Persian monolinguals via Persian version of ANL.Methods: In the present study, the Persian version of ANL was administered on 115 cases with normal hearing (56 male, 59 female) aged 18–37 years in three groups of the Persian monolingual, sequential Arabic-Persian bilinguals, and simultaneous Arabic-Persian bilinguals.Results: The statistical analysis revealed significant difference in most comfortable level (p = 0.002) and background noise level (p = 0.011) among three groups, i.e. between Persian monolinguals and sequential Arabic-Persian bilinguals and between Persian monolinguals and simultaneous Arabic-Persian bilinguals. In other words, mean scores of bilingual were higher than monolingual scores. There was no significant difference among three groups with regard to ANL scores (p = 0.114).Conclusion: Despite the difference between Persian monolinguals and Arabic-Persian bilinguals in most comfortable level and background noise level, there is no significance difference in ANL results. Therefore, auditory central processing acts similarly in normal hearing monolingual and bilingual subjects. As a result, Persian version of ANL can be used for Arabic-Persian bilinguals, too.
2. Nabelek AK, Tucker FM, Letowski TR. Toleration of background noises: relationship with patterns of hearing aid use by elderly persons. J Speech Hear Res. 1991;34(3):679-85. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3403.679
3. Nabelek AK, Freyaldenhoven MC, Tampas JW, Burchfiel SB, Muenchen RA. Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006;17(9):626-39.
4. Nabelek AK, Tampas JW, Burchfield SB. Comparison of speech perception in background noise with acceptance of background noise in aided and unaided conditions. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2004;47(5):1001-11. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2004/074)
5. Mueller HG, Weber J, Hornsby BW. The effects of digital noise reduction on the acceptance of background noise. Trends Amplif. 2006;10(2):83-93. doi: 10.1177/1084713806289553
6. Harkrider AW, Smith SB. Acceptable noise level, phoneme recognition in noise, and measures of auditory efferent activity. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16(8):530-45.
7. Harkrider AW, Tampas JW. Differences in responses from the cochleae and central nervous systems of females with low versus high acceptable noise levels. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006;17(9):667-76.
8. Jonas Brännström K, Olsen SØ. The acceptable noise level and the pure-tone audiogram. Am J Audiol. 2017;26(1):80-7. doi: 10.1044/2016_AJA-16-0033
9. Giussani C, Roux FE, Lubrano V, Gaini SM, Bello L. Review of language organisation in bilingual patients: what can we learn from direct brain mapping? Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2007;149(11):1109-16; discussion 1116. doi: 10.1007/s00701-007-1266-2
10. Wahl M, Marzinzik F, Friederici AD, Hahne A, Kupsch A, Schneider GH, et al. The human thalamus processes syntactic and semantic language violations. Neuron. 2008;59(5):695-707. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.07.011
11. Hernandez AE. Language switching in the bilingual brain: what's next? Brain Lang. 2009;109(2-3):133-40. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2008.12.005
12. Schlauch RS, Nelson P. Puretone evaluation. In: Katz J, Medwetsky L, Burkard R, Hood L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 30-49.
13. Clark JL, Roeser RJ, Mendrygal M. Middle ear measures. In: Roeser RJ, Valente M, Hosford-Dunn H, editors. Audiology diagnosis. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme; 2007. p. 380-99.
14. Richards JC, Schmidt R. Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. 4th ed. New York: Routledge; 2013.
15. Harley TA. The psychology of language: from data to theory. 3rd ed. New York: Psychology Press; 2008.
16. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;9(1):97-113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
17. Shi LF, Azcona G, Buten L. Acceptance noise level: effects of the speech signal, babble, and listener language. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015;58(2):497-508. doi: 10.1044/2015_JSLHR-H-14-0244
18. Khateb A, Abutalebi J, Michel CM, Pegna AJ, Lee-Jahnke H, Annoni JM. Language selection in bilinguals: a spatio-temporal analysis of electric brain activity. Int J Psychophysiol. 2007;65(3):201-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.04.008
19. Ahmadi A, Fatahi J, Keshani A, Jalilvand H, Modarresi Y, Jalaie S. Developing and evaluating the reliability of acceptable noise level test in Persian language. J Rehab Med. 2015;4(2):109-17.
20. Rogers DS, Harkrider AW, Burchfield SB, Nabelek AK. The influence of listener's gender on the acceptance of background noise. J Am Acad Audiol. 2003;14(7):372-82; quiz 401.
21. McArdle R, Hnath-Chisolm T. Speech audiometry. In: Katz J, Medwetsky L, Burkard R, Hood L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 64-79.
22. Festman J, Rodriguez-Fornells A, Münte TF. Individual differences in control of language interference in
late bilinguals are mainly related to general executive abilities. Behav Brain Funct. 2010;6:5. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-6-5
23. Ho H-C, Wu Y-H, Hsiao S-H, Stangl E, Lentz EJ, Bentler RA. The equivalence of acceptable noise level (ANL) with English, Mandarin, and non-semantic speech: a study across the U.S. and Taiwan. Int J Audiol. 2013;52(2):83-91. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2012.733422
24. von Hapsburg D, Bahng J. Acceptance of background noise levels in bilingual (Korean-English) listeners. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006;17(9):649-58.
Copyright and Conflict of Interest
All submitted manuscripts should be accompanied with a statement from the author, showing there is no conflict of interest regarding that article. A conflict of interest, here, is a situation in which a medical research scientist, has competing professional or personal interests that make it difficult to fulfill his duties fairly. A conflict of interest can exist even if no unethical or improper act results from it, and can create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine confidence in the person or profession.
The right is reserved for the journal to accept or reject the submitted article or incorporate any changes deemed necessary by the editorial board to make contributions harmonize the editorial standards of the journal.
Accepted papers become the permanent property of Auditory and Vestibular Research.
The act of submitting a manuscript to the journal carries with it the right to publish that paper and implies the transfer of the copyright from the author to the Publisher.