Use of Low-Pass Noise in Word-Recognition Testing This study attempted to determine whether word-recognition scores obtained in noise were more sensitive to the presence of a hearing loss than recognition scores obtained in quiet. Subjects with normal hearing, high-frequency cochlear hearing loss, and flat cochlear hearing loss were tested in quiet and in the presence of a ... Tutorial
Tutorial  |   March 01, 1976
Use of Low-Pass Noise in Word-Recognition Testing
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ronald L. Cohen
    Saint Elizabeth Hospital, Covington, Kentucky
  • Robert W. Keith
    University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Ohio
Article Information
Tutorials
Tutorial   |   March 01, 1976
Use of Low-Pass Noise in Word-Recognition Testing
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, March 1976, Vol. 19, 48-54. doi:10.1044/jshr.1901.48
History: Received September 16, 1974 , Accepted August 28, 1975
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, March 1976, Vol. 19, 48-54. doi:10.1044/jshr.1901.48
History: Received September 16, 1974; Accepted August 28, 1975

This study attempted to determine whether word-recognition scores obtained in noise were more sensitive to the presence of a hearing loss than recognition scores obtained in quiet. Subjects with normal hearing, high-frequency cochlear hearing loss, and flat cochlear hearing loss were tested in quiet and in the presence of a 500-Hz low-pass noise. Two signal-to-noise conditions were employed, −4 dB and −12 dB. Words were presented at 40 dB SL in one experiment and at 96 dB SPL for normal-hearing subjects in a second experiment. The results indicated that, while the word-recognition scores of groups were similar in quiet, the more negative the signal-to-noise ratio, the greater the separation of group scores, with hearing-impaired subjects having poorer recognition scores than normal-hearing subjects. When the speech and noise were presented at high SPLs, however, the normal-hearing subjects had poorer word recognition than those with flat cochlear losses. The results are interpreted as indicating greater spread of masking in normal-hearing than hearing-impaired subjects at high sound pressure levels.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access