Download PDF
Semin Hear 2013; 34(02): 110-117
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1341347
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Individual Variability in Benefit from Fixed and Adaptive Directional Microphones

Jason A. Galster
1   Starkey Hearing Technologies, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
,
Krishna S. Rodemerk
1   Starkey Hearing Technologies, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
22 April 2013 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study aimed to document improvements in speech recognition when listening through fixed or adaptive directional microphone arrays relative to listening through omnidirectional microphone arrays in a variety of near-field noise conditions. Twelve participants with mild to severe hearing loss were recruited. Data were analyzed in a manner to facilitate discussion of both group and individual performance. The activation of directional microphones significantly improved speech recognition in all listening conditions when compared to omnidirectional listening conditions. Significant differences in speech recognition performance were not observed between fixed and adaptive directional microphone conditions. Analysis of individual outcomes shows a wide range of both absolute speech recognition scores and directional benefit across treatment conditions.

Keywords

Hearing aids - audiology - directional microphones - adaptive directional microphones - directional benefit
 

  • References

  • 1 Ricketts TA. Directional hearing aids. Trends Amplif 2001; 5: 139-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bentler RA. Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16: 473-484
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ricketts T, Henry P. Evaluation of an adaptive, directional-microphone hearing aid. Int J Audiol 2002; 41: 100-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. 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: 1085-1099
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cox RM, Alexander GC, Gilmore CA. Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST). Ear Hear 1987; 8 (5, Suppl) 119S-126S
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ricketts TA, Hornsby BWY, Johnson EE. Adaptive directional benefit in the near field: competing sound angle and level effects. Semin Hear 2005; 26: 59-69
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bentler RA, Tubbs JL, Egge JLM, Flamme GA, Dittberner AB. Evaluation of an adaptive directional system in a DSP hearing aid. Am J Audiol 2004; 13: 73-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Woods WS, Trine TD. Limitations of theoretical benefit from an adaptive directional system in reverberant environments. Acoust Res Lett Online 2004; 5: 153-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ricketts TA, Mueller HG. Predicting directional hearing aid benefit for individual listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11: 561-569 , quiz 575
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Galster EA, Burk M, Gregiore E. Clinical factors affecting directional benefit. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American Auditory Society; March 2012; Phoenix, AZ
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Holube I, Fredelake S, Vlaming M, Kollmeier B. Development and analysis of an International Speech Test Signal (ISTS). Int J Audiol 2010; 49: 891-903
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Mackersie CL, Boothroyd A, Minniear D. Evaluation of a computer-assisted speech perception assessment test (CASPA). J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12: 390-396
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Studebaker GA. A “rationalized” arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res 1985; 28: 455-462
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar