Auditory recognition of Persian digits in presence of speech-spectrum noise and multi-talker babble: a validation study
Background and Aim: Digits are suitable speech materials for evaluating recognition of speech-in-noise in clients with the wide range of language abilities. Farsi Auditory Recognition of Digit-in-Noise (FARDIN) test has been developed and validated in learning-disabled children showing dichotic listening deficit. This study was conducted for further validation of FARDIN and to survey the effects of noise type on the recognition performance in individuals with sensory-neural hearing impairment.
Methods: Persian monosyllabic digits 1−10 were extracted from the audio file of FARDIN test. Ten lists were compiled using a random order of the triplets. The first five lists were mixed with multi-talker babble noise (MTBN) and the second five lists with speech-spectrum noise (SSN). Signal- to- noise ratio (SNR) varied from +5 to −15 in 5 dB steps. 20 normal hearing and 19 hearing-impaired individuals participated in the current study.
Results: Both types of noise could differentiate the hearing loss from normal hearing. Hearing-impaired group showed weaker performance for digit recognition in MTBN and SSN and needed 4−5.6 dB higher SNR (50%), compared to the normal hearing group. MTBN was more challenging for normal hearing than SSN.
Conclusion: Farsi Auditory Recognition of Digit-in-Noise is a validated test for estimating SNR (50%) in clients with hearing loss. It seems SSN is more appropriate for using as a background noise for testing the performance of auditory recognition of digit-in-noise.
2. Wilson RH, Burks CA, Weakley DG. A comparison of word-recognition abilities assessed with digit pairs and digit triplets in multitalker babble. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42(4):499-510. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2004.10.0134
3. Wilson RH, Weakley DG. The use of digit triplets to evaluate word-recognition abilities in multitalker babble. Semin Hear. 2004;25(1):93-111.
4. McArdle R, Hanth-Chisolm T. Speech audiometry. In: Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood LJ, Tillery KL, editors. Handbook of clinical Audiology. 7th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer; 2015. p. 61-76.
5. McArdle RA, Wilson RH, Burks CA. Speech recog¬nition in multitalker babble using digits, words, and sentences. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16(9):726-39. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16.9.9
6. Carhart R, Tillman TW. Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Arch Otolaryngol. 1970;91(3):273-9. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1970.00770040379010
7. Plomp R, Duquesnoy AJ. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid. Scand Audiol Suppl. 1982;15:95-111.
8. Martin FN, Champlin CA, Chambers JA. Seventh survey of audiometric practices in the United States. J Am Acad Audiol. 1998;9(2):95-104.
9. Mueller HG. Speech audiometry and hearing aid fittings: going steady or casual acquaintances? Hear J. 2001;54(10):19-29. doi: 10.1097/01.HJ.0000294535.51460.0c
10. Heidari M, Mahdavi ME, Heidari F, Akbarzadeh Baghban A. Auditory recognition of Persian digits in multi-talker babble noise: a preliminary study. Aud Vestib Res. 2015;24(3):134-40.
11. Ramkissoon I, Proctor A, Lansing CR, Bilger RC. Digit speech recognition thresholds (SRT) for non-native speakers of English. Am J Audiol. 2002;11(1):23-8. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2002/005)
12. Spreen O, Borkowski JG, Benton AL. Auditory word recognition as a function of meaningfulness, abstractness and phonetic structure. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 1967;6(1):101-4. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80057-4
13. Spreen O, Borkowski JG, Gordon AM. Effects of abstractness, meaningfulness, and phonetic structure on auditory recognition of nouns. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1966;9(4):619-25. doi: 10.1044/jshr.0904.619
14. Jones D, Spreen O. The effects of meaningfulness and abstractness of word recognition in educable retarded children. Am J Ment Defic. 1967;71(6):987-9.
15. Mefferd RB Jr, Lester JW, Wieland BA, Falconer GA, Pokorny AD. Influence of distraction on the reproduction of spoken words by schizophrenics. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1969;149(6):504-9. doi: 10.1097/00005053-196912000-00006
16. Wilson RH, Cates WB. A comparison of two word-recognition tasks in multitalker babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise Test (WIN). J Am Acad Audiol. 2008;19(7):548-56. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.19.7.4
17. Mahdavi ME, Pourbakht A, Parand A, Jalaie S, Rezaeian M, Moradiju E. Auditory recognition of words and digits in multitalker babble in learning-disabled children with dichotic listening deficit. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2017;19(4):e42817. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.42817.
18. Wilson RH, Carnell CS, Cleghorn AL. The Words-in-Noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18(6):522-9. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18.6.7