Frequency-Importance and Transfer Functions for the Auditec of St. Louis Recordings of the NU-6 Word Test Frequency-importance and transfer functions for the Auditec of St. Louis recordings of the NU-6 word test are reported. The functions were derived from the word recognition scores of 24 subjects with normal hearing who were tested under 128 conditions of filtering and talker-spectrum-matched noise. The importance function was broader and ... Research Article
Research Article  |   August 01, 1993
Frequency-Importance and Transfer Functions for the Auditec of St. Louis Recordings of the NU-6 Word Test
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Gerald A. Studebaker
    Memphis State University Memphis, TN
  • Robert L. Sherbecoe
    Memphis State University Memphis, TN
  • Christine Gilmore
    Memphis State University Memphis, TN
  • Contact author: Gerald A. Studebaker, PhD, Memphis Speech and Hearing Center, 807 Jefferson Avenue, Memphis, TN 38105.
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Hearing / Research Articles
Research Article   |   August 01, 1993
Frequency-Importance and Transfer Functions for the Auditec of St. Louis Recordings of the NU-6 Word Test
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 1993, Vol. 36, 799-807. doi:10.1044/jshr.3604.799
History: Received October 20, 1992 , Accepted February 8, 1993
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 1993, Vol. 36, 799-807. doi:10.1044/jshr.3604.799
History: Received October 20, 1992; Accepted February 8, 1993

Frequency-importance and transfer functions for the Auditec of St. Louis recordings of the NU-6 word test are reported. The functions were derived from the word recognition scores of 24 subjects with normal hearing who were tested under 128 conditions of filtering and talker-spectrum-matched noise. The importance function was broader and had a lower midpoint than the NU-6 importance function reported by Schum, Matthews, and Lee (1991), but still displayed a bimodal shape. The transfer function was steeper than the transfer function reported by Schum et al., but comparable in slope to the transfer function for low-context CNC words reported by Bell, Dirks, and Trine (1992) . Results from a limited set of conditions presented in quiet suggest that the use of masking noise was partly responsible for the dissimilar importance and transfer functions obtained by Schum et al. and this study. Differences in the equipment used in each experiment and in the methods used to analyze the data appear to have contributed as well.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Ginger Gray and Joseph Matesich for their help with the data collection, analysis, and instrumentation. Appreciation is also extended to Donald Dirks and Donald Schum for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This project was supported by grant DC00154from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access