Validating a rapid, automated test of spatial release from masking

Kasey M. Jakien, Sean D. Kampel, Meghan M. Stansell, Frederick Gallun

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the test–retest reliability of a headphonebased spatial release from a masking task with two maskers (referred to here as the SR2) and to describe its relationship to the same test done over loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber (the SR2A). We explore what thresholds tell us about certain populations (such as older individuals or individuals with hearing impairment) and discuss how the SR2 might be useful in the clinic. Method: Fifty-four participants completed speech intelligibility tests in which a target phrase and two masking phrases from the Coordinate Response Measure corpus (Bolia, Nelson, Ericson, & Simpson, 2000) were presented either via earphones using a virtual spatial array or via loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber. For the SR2, the target sentence was always at 0° azimuth angle, and the maskers were either colocated at 0° or positioned at ± 45°. For the SR2A, the target was located at 0°, and the maskers were collocated or located at ± 15°, ± 30°, ± 45°, ± 90°, or ± 135°. Spatial release from masking was determined as the difference between thresholds in the colocated condition and each spatially separated condition. All participants completed the SR2 at least twice, and 29 of the individuals who completed the SR2 at least twice also participated in the SR2A. In a second experiment, 40 participants completed the SR2 8 times, and the changes in performance were evaluated as a function of test repetition. Results: Mean thresholds were slightly better on the SR2 after the first repetition but were consistent across 8 subsequent testing sessions. Performance was consistent for the SR2A, regardless of the number of times testing was repeated. The SR2, which simulates 45° separations of target and maskers, produced spatially separated thresholds that were similar to thresholds obtained with 30° of separation in the anechoic chamber. Over headphones and in the anechoic chamber, pure-tone average was a strong predictor of spatial release, whereas age only reached significance for collocated conditions. Conclusions: The SR2 is a reliable and effective method of testing spatial release from masking, suitable for screening abnormal listening abilities and for tracking rehabilitation over time. Future work should focus on developing and validating rapid, automated testing to identify the ability of listeners to benefit from high-frequency amplification, smaller spatial separations, and larger spectral differences among talkers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)507-518
Number of pages12
JournalAmerican Journal of Audiology
Volume26
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2017

Fingerprint

Speech Intelligibility
Hearing Loss
Rehabilitation
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Validating a rapid, automated test of spatial release from masking. / Jakien, Kasey M.; Kampel, Sean D.; Stansell, Meghan M.; Gallun, Frederick.

In: American Journal of Audiology, Vol. 26, No. 4, 01.12.2017, p. 507-518.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jakien, Kasey M. ; Kampel, Sean D. ; Stansell, Meghan M. ; Gallun, Frederick. / Validating a rapid, automated test of spatial release from masking. In: American Journal of Audiology. 2017 ; Vol. 26, No. 4. pp. 507-518.
@article{0fa409d13d3a42f3b8b88503366c4164,
title = "Validating a rapid, automated test of spatial release from masking",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the test–retest reliability of a headphonebased spatial release from a masking task with two maskers (referred to here as the SR2) and to describe its relationship to the same test done over loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber (the SR2A). We explore what thresholds tell us about certain populations (such as older individuals or individuals with hearing impairment) and discuss how the SR2 might be useful in the clinic. Method: Fifty-four participants completed speech intelligibility tests in which a target phrase and two masking phrases from the Coordinate Response Measure corpus (Bolia, Nelson, Ericson, & Simpson, 2000) were presented either via earphones using a virtual spatial array or via loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber. For the SR2, the target sentence was always at 0° azimuth angle, and the maskers were either colocated at 0° or positioned at ± 45°. For the SR2A, the target was located at 0°, and the maskers were collocated or located at ± 15°, ± 30°, ± 45°, ± 90°, or ± 135°. Spatial release from masking was determined as the difference between thresholds in the colocated condition and each spatially separated condition. All participants completed the SR2 at least twice, and 29 of the individuals who completed the SR2 at least twice also participated in the SR2A. In a second experiment, 40 participants completed the SR2 8 times, and the changes in performance were evaluated as a function of test repetition. Results: Mean thresholds were slightly better on the SR2 after the first repetition but were consistent across 8 subsequent testing sessions. Performance was consistent for the SR2A, regardless of the number of times testing was repeated. The SR2, which simulates 45° separations of target and maskers, produced spatially separated thresholds that were similar to thresholds obtained with 30° of separation in the anechoic chamber. Over headphones and in the anechoic chamber, pure-tone average was a strong predictor of spatial release, whereas age only reached significance for collocated conditions. Conclusions: The SR2 is a reliable and effective method of testing spatial release from masking, suitable for screening abnormal listening abilities and for tracking rehabilitation over time. Future work should focus on developing and validating rapid, automated testing to identify the ability of listeners to benefit from high-frequency amplification, smaller spatial separations, and larger spectral differences among talkers.",
author = "Jakien, {Kasey M.} and Kampel, {Sean D.} and Stansell, {Meghan M.} and Frederick Gallun",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0013",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "507--518",
journal = "American Journal of Audiology",
issn = "1059-0889",
publisher = "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validating a rapid, automated test of spatial release from masking

AU - Jakien, Kasey M.

AU - Kampel, Sean D.

AU - Stansell, Meghan M.

AU - Gallun, Frederick

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the test–retest reliability of a headphonebased spatial release from a masking task with two maskers (referred to here as the SR2) and to describe its relationship to the same test done over loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber (the SR2A). We explore what thresholds tell us about certain populations (such as older individuals or individuals with hearing impairment) and discuss how the SR2 might be useful in the clinic. Method: Fifty-four participants completed speech intelligibility tests in which a target phrase and two masking phrases from the Coordinate Response Measure corpus (Bolia, Nelson, Ericson, & Simpson, 2000) were presented either via earphones using a virtual spatial array or via loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber. For the SR2, the target sentence was always at 0° azimuth angle, and the maskers were either colocated at 0° or positioned at ± 45°. For the SR2A, the target was located at 0°, and the maskers were collocated or located at ± 15°, ± 30°, ± 45°, ± 90°, or ± 135°. Spatial release from masking was determined as the difference between thresholds in the colocated condition and each spatially separated condition. All participants completed the SR2 at least twice, and 29 of the individuals who completed the SR2 at least twice also participated in the SR2A. In a second experiment, 40 participants completed the SR2 8 times, and the changes in performance were evaluated as a function of test repetition. Results: Mean thresholds were slightly better on the SR2 after the first repetition but were consistent across 8 subsequent testing sessions. Performance was consistent for the SR2A, regardless of the number of times testing was repeated. The SR2, which simulates 45° separations of target and maskers, produced spatially separated thresholds that were similar to thresholds obtained with 30° of separation in the anechoic chamber. Over headphones and in the anechoic chamber, pure-tone average was a strong predictor of spatial release, whereas age only reached significance for collocated conditions. Conclusions: The SR2 is a reliable and effective method of testing spatial release from masking, suitable for screening abnormal listening abilities and for tracking rehabilitation over time. Future work should focus on developing and validating rapid, automated testing to identify the ability of listeners to benefit from high-frequency amplification, smaller spatial separations, and larger spectral differences among talkers.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the test–retest reliability of a headphonebased spatial release from a masking task with two maskers (referred to here as the SR2) and to describe its relationship to the same test done over loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber (the SR2A). We explore what thresholds tell us about certain populations (such as older individuals or individuals with hearing impairment) and discuss how the SR2 might be useful in the clinic. Method: Fifty-four participants completed speech intelligibility tests in which a target phrase and two masking phrases from the Coordinate Response Measure corpus (Bolia, Nelson, Ericson, & Simpson, 2000) were presented either via earphones using a virtual spatial array or via loudspeakers in an anechoic chamber. For the SR2, the target sentence was always at 0° azimuth angle, and the maskers were either colocated at 0° or positioned at ± 45°. For the SR2A, the target was located at 0°, and the maskers were collocated or located at ± 15°, ± 30°, ± 45°, ± 90°, or ± 135°. Spatial release from masking was determined as the difference between thresholds in the colocated condition and each spatially separated condition. All participants completed the SR2 at least twice, and 29 of the individuals who completed the SR2 at least twice also participated in the SR2A. In a second experiment, 40 participants completed the SR2 8 times, and the changes in performance were evaluated as a function of test repetition. Results: Mean thresholds were slightly better on the SR2 after the first repetition but were consistent across 8 subsequent testing sessions. Performance was consistent for the SR2A, regardless of the number of times testing was repeated. The SR2, which simulates 45° separations of target and maskers, produced spatially separated thresholds that were similar to thresholds obtained with 30° of separation in the anechoic chamber. Over headphones and in the anechoic chamber, pure-tone average was a strong predictor of spatial release, whereas age only reached significance for collocated conditions. Conclusions: The SR2 is a reliable and effective method of testing spatial release from masking, suitable for screening abnormal listening abilities and for tracking rehabilitation over time. Future work should focus on developing and validating rapid, automated testing to identify the ability of listeners to benefit from high-frequency amplification, smaller spatial separations, and larger spectral differences among talkers.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85037832789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85037832789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0013

DO - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0013

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 507

EP - 518

JO - American Journal of Audiology

JF - American Journal of Audiology

SN - 1059-0889

IS - 4

ER -