PubMed · 7209210
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Mélon. 1981-01-15. [Deafness: general aspects].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7209210/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Assistive technology involving voice communication is used primarily by people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or who have speech and/or language disabilities. It is also used to a lesser extent by people with visual or motor disabilities. A very wide range of devices has been developed for people with hearing loss. These devices can be categorized not only by the modality of stimulation [i.e., auditory, visual, tactile, or direct electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve (auditory-neural)] but also in terms of the degree of speech processing that is used. At least four such categories can be distinguished: assistive devices (a) that are not designed specifically for speech, (b) that take the average characteristics of speech into account, (c) that process articulatory or phonetic characteristics of speech, and (d) that embody some degree of automatic speech recognition. Assistive devices for people with speech and/or language disabilities typically involve some form of speech synthesis or symbol generation for severe forms of language disability. Speech synthesis is also used in text-to-speech systems for sightless persons. Other applications of assistive technology involving voice communication include voice control of wheelchairs and other devices for people with mobility disabilities.
Two experiments are reported in this study. In the first experiment the masking effect of five different types of narrow-band maskers was compared. The masker was either a tone, a narrow-band Gaussian noise, or a multiplication noise obtained by multiplying a sinusoid with a low-pass Gaussian noise. The noise maskers had a bandwidth of either 20 or 100 Hz. In all cases the masker had a center frequency of 1.3 kHz and a duration of 500 ms. Five-point growth-of-masking functions were measured using a 2-kHz tonal target with a duration of 400 ms, temporally centered in the masker. Six subjects participated in the experiment. Although considerable intersubject differences were observed, the data of all subjects showed several common trends. First, the tonal maskers produced more masking than the noise maskers. Second, Gaussian noise maskers produced more masking than multiplication noise maskers of the same bandwidth. Finally, 100-Hz-wide noise maskers produced more masking than 20-Hz-wide maskers of the same type. Differences in masked thresholds between the various masker types generally increased with masker level, and exceeded 25 dB in some conditions. The results are discussed in terms of masker envelope fluctuations. In the second experiment the masking effect was investigated for a bandpass noise at 1.3 kHz, with regular zero crossings, but with the envelope characteristics of a 100-Hz-wide Gaussian noise. Five-point growth-of-masking functions were measured using a tonal target of 2 kHz.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Sensitivity to interaural time delays (ITDs) within high-frequency sinusoidally amplitude-modulated (SAM) target tones was measured in the presence of a second, spectrally remote diotic SAM tone (termed an interferer). Targets and interferers were 100% modulated at 250 Hz and each was presented at 77 dB SPL for a duration of 250 ms. The modulations of targets and interferers were either in-phase or out-of-phase. In the first experiment, when the target SAM tone was centered at 4 kHz, interferers were centered at either 500 Hz, 1 kHz, or 2 kHz. Threshold ITDs were substantially increased in the presence of the interferers as compared to when the targets were presented in isolation. The greatest effects were observed with interferers centered at 500 Hz and 1 kHz. In the second experiment, when the target SAM tone was centered at 2 kHz, interferers were centered at either 500 Hz or 4 kHz. Threshold ITDs increased in the presence of either interferer, but the greatest increase occurred in the presence of the 500-Hz SAM tone. In the third experiment, it was found that presenting the low-frequency SAM tones continuously resulted in less interference than did presenting the interferers and targets coincidently. In all three experiments, the effects produced by the interferers did not depend upon whether they were modulated in-phase or out-of-phase with the target. Taken together, the data argue against the notion that the interference could result from a peripheral, monaural interaction between target and interferer waveforms.