↓ Skip to main content

Factors Affecting Speech Reception in Background Noise with a Vocoder Implementation of the FAST Algorithm

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Factors Affecting Speech Reception in Background Noise with a Vocoder Implementation of the FAST Algorithm
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10162-018-0672-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaikat Hossain, Raymond L. Goldsworthy

Abstract

Speech segregation in background noise remains a difficult task for individuals with hearing loss. Several signal processing strategies have been developed to improve the efficacy of hearing assistive technologies in complex listening environments. The present study measured speech reception thresholds in normal-hearing listeners attending to a vocoder based on the Fundamental Asynchronous Stimulus Timing algorithm (FAST: Smith et al. 2014), which triggers pulses based on the amplitudes of channel magnitudes in order to preserve envelope timing cues, with two different reconstruction bandwidths (narrowband and broadband) to control the degree of spectrotemporal resolution. Five types of background noise were used including same male talker, female talker, time-reversed male talker, time-reversed female talker, and speech-shaped noise to probe the contributions of different types of speech segregation cues and to elucidate how degradation affects speech reception across these conditions. Maskers were spatialized using head-related transfer functions in order to create co-located and spatially separated conditions. Results indicate that benefits arising from voicing and spatial cues can be preserved using the FAST algorithm but are reduced with a reduction in spectral resolution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Researcher 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 12 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 4 11%
Engineering 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 13 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2018.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
#380
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,476
of 329,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,562 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.