Effects of Intra-Talker Differences on Speech Understanding in Noise by Younger and Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects on intelligibility when listening to a talker who produced speech while being exposed to different types and levels of noise.In addition, we also investigated how the word identification performance of younger and older listeners for these conditions was affected in different listening environments.A male young adult talker recorded the SPIN-R test while listening to different types and levels of noise and following different speaking instructions.Younger and older adults with clinically normal hearing from 250 to 3000 Hz were tested on these recordings in three signal-to-noise ratios.Significant word recognition differences were found between the standard talking condition and loud speech recorded in quiet, despite the fact that all sentences were equated for overall intensity.Older listeners found speech produced in noise beneficial when there was more background noise, but younger listeners did not.Clear speech in this study did not produce any benefit for listeners relative to the baseline condition.Acoustic analyses showed that intensity fluctuations within the sentences led to a higher intensity for target words in the loud speech condition relative to all other conditions, while target words in clear speech had a lower fundamental frequency compared to other conditions.Listener performance may change on a test of speech intelligibility when speech is produced under more ecologically valid conditions; however, these effects are small and may be more apparent in older adults and when task difficulty is greater due to lack of contextual support and higher levels of background noise. SOMMAIRELe but de cette tude tait d'explorer l'effet sur l'intelligibilit de la parole lorsque celle-ci est produite en prsence de diffrents niveaux et types de bruit.L'effet de ces conditions de production de la parole en prsence de diffrents environnements d'coute sur les performances l'identification des mots a t examin auprs de jeunes adultes et d'adultes plus gs, prsentant des seuils auditifs normaux entre 250 et 3000 Hz.Les phrases du test SPIN-R mises par un locuteur d'ge adulte ont t enregistres pendant qu'il coutait diffrents bruits diffrents niveaux et suivait diverses instructions.Ces phrases ont t prsentes trois rapports signal-sur-bruit auprs des deux groupes de participants.Une diffrence significative a t note entre le nombre de mots reconnus dans la condition de discours standard et la condition de discours enregistr volume lv dans un environnement de silence et ce, mme en ayant normalis le niveau de prsentation de toutes les phrases.Les auditeurs plus gs ont trouv que le discours produit dans le bruit tait plus facile reconnatre lorsque les phrases taient prsentes avec le bruit de fond au niveau plus haut, mais ce n'tait pas le cas pour les jeunes auditeurs.Pour tous les participants, le discours clairement prononc n'a pas entran des performances significativement meilleures, par rapport au discours standard.Les analyses acoustiques ont montr que l'intensit tait 2 dB plus haute sur les mots cibles des phrases produites en prsence de bruit par rapport aux autres conditions d'enregistrement, alors que la frquence fondamentale des mots cibles du discours clairement prononc tait plus basse que celle des autres conditions.Les performances aux mesures de reconnaissance de la parole peuvent varier en fonction des conditions dans lesquelles cette parole est produite.Ces effets sont peut-tre minimes chez les jeunes adultes, mais peuvent tre encore plus apparents chez les personnes ges et lorsque la tche de reconnaissance est plus difficile en raison du manque d'indices contextuels et des niveaux levs de bruit de fond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".