• Volume/Page
  • Keyword
  • DOI
  • Citation
  • Advanced
   
 
 
 

Psychometric properties of the coordinate response measure corpus with various types of background interference a

a Portions of this research were presented at the 159th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, April, 2010 in Baltimore, MD.

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 131, Issue 2, pp. EL177-EL183 (2012); (7 pages)

David A. Eddins1 and Chang Liu2

1Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Global Center for Hearing & Speech Research, University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, PCD 1017, Tampa, Florida 33620 deddins@usf.edu
2Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A1100, Austin, Texas 78712 changliu@mail.utexas.edu

Full Text: Read Online (HTML) | Download PDF FREE | View Cart
The coordinate response measure (CRM) corpus has gained broad acceptance as a research tool for investigating speech intelligibility in background competition and has been widely used in studies of informational masking. The purpose of this study is to establish the psychometric characteristics of CRM target-word identification in various backgrounds with the goal of being able to determine when it is appropriate or not to use adaptive threshold procedures with the CRM corpus. Target-word identification performance based on adaptive tracking mapped directly onto the monotonic psychometric functions obtained for two-talker, four-talker, and cafeteria noise interferers.

© 2012 Acoustical Society of America

Acknowledgment

Work supported in part by NIH NIA Grant No. P01 AG009524.

Article Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Method
    1. Listeners
    2. Stimuli
    3. Procedures
      1. General procedures
      2. Method of constant stimuli
      3. Adaptive up-down tracking
  3. Results
  4. Discussion and conclusions

KEYWORDS and PACS

PACS

  • 43.71.Gv

    Measures of speech perception (intelligibility and quality)

  • 43.71.An

    Models and theories of speech perception

ARTICLE DATA

History
Received 16 Nov 2011
Accepted 29 Dec 2011
Published online 26 Jan 2012

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN

0001-4966 (print)  

  1. ANSI (2010). S3.21-2010, Methods for Manual Pure-tone Threshold Audiometry (American National Standards Institute, New York) doi:10.1137/0111030SMJMAP000011000002000431000001.
  2. Bolia, R. S., Nelson, W. T., Ericson, M. A., and Simpson, B. D. (2000). “A speech corpus for multitalker communications research,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 1065–1066.
  3. Brungart, D. S. (2001a). “Evaluation of speech intelligibility with the coordinate response measure,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109, 2276–2279.
  4. Brungart, D. S. (2001b). “Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109, 1101–1109.
  5. Brungart, D. S., and Simpson, B. D. (2007). “Effect of target-masker similarity on across-ear interference in a dichotic cocktail-party listening task,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 1724–1734.
  6. Brungart, D. S., Simpson, B. D., Ericson, M. A., and Scott, K. R. (2001). “Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 2527–2538.
  7. Levitt, H. (1971). “Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49(2), Suppl. 2, 467–77.
  8. Marquardt, D. W. (1963). “An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters,” J. Soc. Indust. Appl. Math. 11, 431–441.
  9. McMillan, N. A., and Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection Theory: A User's Guide (Cambridge University Press, New York).
  10. Resnick, J. B., Dubno, J. R., Hoffnung, S., and Levitt, H. (1975). “Phoneme errors on a nonsense syllable test,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 58, Suppl. 1, 114.

Figures (click on thumbnails to view enlargements)

FIG.1
(Color online) Psychometric functions and adaptive thresholds for target identification using the CRM and three types of interfering sounds. Psychometric functions are shown for each of the 13 listeners in panels A (two-talker CRM inteferer), B (four-talker babble), and C (cafeteria noise). Thick lines represent the function obtained by averaging percent correct scores at each SNR value across the 13 listeners. Open symbols connected by lines in panel D show the averaged psychometric functions derived from the individual fitting functions obtained using Eq. ( 1 ) for each of the 13 listeners, computing the average value of the growth constant (b) and midpoint (X0), and solving for the correct SNR values. Filled symbols with error bars indicate the mean and standard deviation of the 70.7 and 29.3 % correct thresholds across the 13 listeners estimated from the adaptive up-down method.

FIG.1 Download High Resolution Image (.zip file) | Export Figure to PowerPoint

FIG.2
The individual 70.7% (left panel) and 29.3% (right panel) thresholds (SNR in dB) from the method of constant stimuli as a function of thresholds (SNR in dB) from the adaptive tracking method for the three types of interferers. The diagonal dashed line in each panel indicates a perfect match between the two sets of thresholds. The correlations between the thresholds of the two methods across the three maskers were significant (Pearson r = 0.971 for the 70.7% thresholds and r = 0.936 for the 29.3% thresholds; p < 0.05).

FIG.2 Download High Resolution Image (.zip file) | Export Figure to PowerPoint



Close

close