Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] National Hearing Test From: Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:58:07 -0700 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3466108692_3555964 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Dick, The literature is replete of work on this; among others, a bunches of paper= s by Larry Summers and colleagues at Chuck=B9s university (Indiana) and another bunch by our ASA president elect Judy Dubno and her group will show you suc= h correlation (it=B9s late and I am not going to give you the specifics, my excuses). However, the same folks and others (like my group) have shown tha= t threshold elevation alone does not explain the loss of speech intelligibility in noise. Although you are young compared to some of us, yo= u are now at the low end of the age range Larry, Judy, and I (and many others= ) have studied. In my lab, we tested over 200 over-60 folks with hearing loss not exceeding what is considered moderate and found pretty poor speech understanding in the majority of them, including those who had practically normal hearing. Unfortunately we have also seen that the loss of speech intelligibility in interference increases at a rate faster than the increas= e of hearing threshold. -Pierre From: "Richard F. Lyon" <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> Reply-To: "Richard F. Lyon" <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thursday, October 31, 2013 at 11:20 AM To: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: National Hearing Test I took the test just now and got the expected result: "slightly below normal range" in both ears (expected, based on previous tests that show somewhat worse than typical hearing for my 61-year age). It would be great if there was better quantification of the result, like dB of SNR degradation relative to normal, rather than just "slightly below normal range". Charles, is there a numeric range associated with these words? It does seem like a pretty effective test of hearing in noise. I presume it's doing an adaptive SNR process, since it would usually give me a relatively easy one after each one where I was pretty much guessing. What I'd like to understand better is exactly how the mechanisms causing threshold elevation also cause degradation of SNR threshold. I presume tha= t the auditory filter bandwidths are wider, and the compression less, with hearing loss. But they're also wider at high levels, and high levels don't cause a degraded SNR threshold, do they? Or maybe they do, in normal hearing, at levels high enough to cause this much bandwidth widening? I've definitely been feeling a degraded ability to deal with conversation i= n noisy environments (cafes and such), which I understand is correlated with absolute threshold elevation. I'm just not clear on why it's so correlated= . Is it understood? Is there a good paper on this? Dick On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Watson, Charles S. <watson@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Tom, > I know it is hard to accept that the telephone test works as well as it d= oes, > given the experiences we have all had with a range of signal qualities fo= r > unselected home telephones. However the data showed that tests taken wit= h > over 100 different home phones used by the veterans in our validation stu= dy > yielded a similar correlation between the telephone SNR for 50% correct > recognition and average pure-tone thresholds to that obtained with the > carefully selected telephones used to administer the test in three VA cli= nics. > We have also tested a sample of different phones to determine the range o= f > distortion and bandwidths, and found them to be acceptable if speech hear= d > over them was not noticeably distorted. >=20 > Most importantly, the range of absolute levels delivered by various phone= s > would be quite important if the test measured pure-tone thresholds in the > quiet. The test works because of the insight of Smits and his colleagues= that > SNR thresholds can be quite reliable under a range of reproductive condit= ions > for which absolute thresholds would be virtually meaningless. >=20 > Chuck Watson >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Brennan [mailto:g_brennantg@xxxxxxxx > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 6:01 AM > To: Watson, Charles S. > Cc: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: National Hearing Test >=20 > Actually, my comments about telephone service are based on having lived i= n > Germany for nearly five years and having a number of friends in Europe. = I do > believe their telephone system superior to ours. This is especially true= of > their cell phone system but is to a lesser degree of their land lines. >=20 > I wonder if some kind of feedback loop could legally be set up to help kn= ow > what kind of phone system a client doing this test i susing. >=20 > Of course, another issue revolves around the fact that most telephones no= w > allow the user to control the volume of the receiver thus adding another > confo7unding variable to the mix. >=20 > Tom >=20 >=20 > Tom Brennan KD5VIJ, CCC-A/SLP > web page http://titan.sfasu.edu/~g_brennantg/sonicpage.html --B_3466108692_3555964 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable <html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: s= pace; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size:= 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div>Dick,</div><div><br></div><di= v>The literature is replete of work on this; among others, a bunches of pape= rs by Larry Summers and colleagues at Chuck’s university (Indiana) and= another bunch by our ASA president elect Judy Dubno and her group will show= you such correlation (it’s late and I am not going to give you the sp= ecifics, my excuses). However, the same folks and others (like my group) hav= e shown that threshold elevation alone does not explain the loss of speech i= ntelligibility in noise. Although you are young compared to some of us, you = are now at the low end of the age range Larry, Judy, and I (and many others)= have studied. In my lab, we tested over 200 over-60 folks with hearing loss= not exceeding what is considered moderate and found pretty poor speech unde= rstanding in the majority of them, including those who had practically norma= l hearing. Unfortunately we have also seen that the loss of speech intelligi= bility in interference increases at a rate faster than the increase of heari= ng threshold.</div><div><br></div><div>-Pierre</div><div><br></div><span id=3D= "OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style=3D"font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text= -align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium no= ne; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: = #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span style=3D= "font-weight:bold">From: </span> "Richard F. Lyon" <<a href=3D"mailto:dickl= yon@xxxxxxxx">dicklyon@xxxxxxxx</a>><br><span style=3D"font-weight:bold">Repl= y-To: </span> "Richard F. Lyon" <<a href=3D"mailto:dicklyon@xxxxxxxx">dickly= on@xxxxxxxx</a>><br><span style=3D"font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Thursday,= October 31, 2013 at 11:20 AM<br><span style=3D"font-weight:bold">To: </span> = <<a href=3D"mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx">AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx</a>&g= t;<br><span style=3D"font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> Re: National Hearing T= est<br></div><div><br></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>I took the test ju= st now and got the expected result: "slightly below normal range" in b= oth ears (expected, based on previous tests that show somewhat worse than ty= pical hearing for my 61-year age).<br><br></div><div>It would be great if th= ere was better quantification of the result, like dB of SNR degradation relative to normal, rather than just "slightly below normal range". Charles, is there a numeric range associated with these words?<br><br></div>It does seem like a pretty effective test of= hearing in noise. I presume it's doing an adaptive SNR process, since= it would usually give me a relatively easy one after each one where I was p= retty much guessing.<br><br></div>What I'd like to understand better is exac= tly how the mechanisms causing threshold elevation also cause degradation of= SNR threshold. I presume that the auditory filter bandwidths are wide= r, and the compression less, with hearing loss. But they're also wider= at high levels, and high levels don't cause a degraded SNR threshold, do th= ey? Or maybe they do, in normal hearing, at levels high enough to caus= e this much bandwidth widening?<br><br>I've definitely been feeling a degrad= ed ability to deal with conversation in noisy environments (cafes and such),= which I understand is correlated with absolute threshold elevation. I= 'm just not clear on why it's so correlated. Is it understood? I= s there a good paper on this?<br><br>Dick<br><br><br><div><br><br></div></di= v></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Oc= t 30, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Watson, Charles S. <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailt= o:watson@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">watson@xxxxxxxx</a>></span> wrot= e:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1= px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Tom,<br> I know it is hard to accept that the telephone test works as well as it doe= s, given the experiences we have all had with a range of signal qualities fo= r unselected home telephones. However the data showed that tests taken= with over 100 different home phones used by the veterans in our validation = study yielded a similar correlation between the telephone SNR for 50% correc= t recognition and average pure-tone thresholds to that obtained with the car= efully selected telephones used to administer the test in three VA clinics. = We have also tested a sample of different phones to determine the rang= e of distortion and bandwidths, and found them to be acceptable if speech he= ard over them was not noticeably distorted.<br><br> Most importantly, the range of absolute levels delivered by various phones = would be quite important if the test measured pure-tone thresholds in the qu= iet. The test works because of the insight of Smits and his colleagues= that SNR thresholds can be quite reliable under a range of reproductive con= ditions for which absolute thresholds would be virtually meaningless.<br><di= v class=3D"im HOEnZb"><br> Chuck Watson<br><br><br><br> -----Original Message-----<br> From: Tom Brennan [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:g_brennantg@xxxxxxxx">g_br= ennantg@xxxxxxxx</a>]<br></div><div class=3D"im HOEnZb">Sent: Wednesday= , October 30, 2013 6:01 AM<br> To: Watson, Charles S.<br> Cc: <a href=3D"mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx">AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx</a><= br> Subject: Re: National Hearing Test<br><br></div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div cl= ass=3D"h5">Actually, my comments about telephone service are based on having l= ived in Germany for nearly five years and having a number of friends in Euro= pe. I do believe their telephone system superior to ours. This i= s especially true of their cell phone system but is to a lesser degree of th= eir land lines.<br><br> I wonder if some kind of feedback loop could legally be set up to help know= what kind of phone system a client doing this test i susing.<br><br> Of course, another issue revolves around the fact that most telephones now = allow the user to control the volume of the receiver thus adding another con= fo7unding variable to the mix.<br><br> Tom<br><br><br> Tom Brennan KD5VIJ, CCC-A/SLP<br> web page <a href=3D"http://titan.sfasu.edu/~g_brennantg/sonicpage.html" targe= t=3D"_blank">http://titan.sfasu.edu/~g_brennantg/sonicpage.html</a><br></div><= /div></blockquote></div><br></div></span></body></html> --B_3466108692_3555964--