Preferred Strength of Noise Reduction for Normally Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.

Preference for noise reduction (NR) strength differs between individuals. The purpose of this study was (1) to investigate whether hearing loss influences this preference, (2) to find the number of distinct settings required to classify participants in similar groups based on their preference for NR strength, and (3) to estimate the number of paired comparisons needed to predict to which preference group a participant belongs. A paired comparison paradigm was used in which participants listened to pairs of speech-in-noise stimuli processed by NR with 10 different strength settings. Participants indicated their preferred sound sample. The 30 participants were divided into three groups according to hearing status (normal hearing, mild hearing loss, and moderate hearing loss). The results showed that (1) participants with moderate hearing loss preferred stronger NR than participants with normal hearing; (2) cluster analysis based solely on the preference for NR strength showed that the data could be described well by dividing the participants into three preference clusters; (3) the appropriate cluster membership could be found with 15 paired comparisons. We conclude that on average, a higher hearing loss is related to a preference for stronger NR, at least for our NR algorithm and our participants. The results show that it might be possible to use a limited set of pre-set NR strengths that can be chosen clinically. For our NR one might use three settings: no NR, intermediate NR, and strong NR. Paired comparisons might be used to find the optimal one of the three settings.

Individual Listener Preference for Strength of Single-Microphone Noise-Reduction; Trade-off Between Noise Tolerance and Signal Distortion Tolerance.

There are large interindividual variations in preference for strength of noise-reduction (NR). It is hypothesized that each individual's tolerance for background noise on one hand and signal distortions on the other hand form this preference. We aim to visualize and analyze this so-called trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality. Dutch sentences in stationary background noise were processed with different NR strengths. We used an NR algorithm that allows us to separate the positive effects of NR (noise attenuation) from the negative effects (signal distortion). Stimuli consisted of speech in noise with different degrees of (1) background noise, (2) signal distortions, or (3) both (i.e., realistic NR at different NR strengths). With pairwise comparisons, participants chose which stimulus they preferred for prolonged listening. Twelve listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss participated in the study. For all participants, a trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality was found and visualized. The strength of preference was estimated with the Bradley-Terry-Luce choice model and was different for all individuals but in the same order of magnitude for distortion effects and noise effects. Strength of preference of realistic NR was smaller by a factor of ten. This study used a unique setup to capture the individual trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality in NR. Disturbance from signal distortions is as important as disturbance from background noise for determining preference for NR strength. Individual listeners differ in their sensitivity to both factors and as a consequence in their preferred NR strength.

Measuring the Influence of Noise Reduction on Listening Effort in Hearing-Impaired Listeners Using Response Times to an Arithmetic Task in Noise.

Single microphone noise reduction (NR) in hearing aids can provide a subjective benefit even when there is no objective improvement in speech intelligibility. A possible explanation lies in a reduction of listening effort. Previously, we showed that response times (a proxy for listening effort) to an auditory-only dual-task were reduced by NR in normal-hearing (NH) listeners. In this study, we investigate if the results from NH listeners extend to the hearing-impaired (HI), the target group for hearing aids. In addition, we assess the relevance of the outcome measure for studying and understanding listening effort. Twelve HI subjects were asked to sum two digits of a digit triplet in noise. We measured response times to this task, as well as subjective listening effort and speech intelligibility. Stimuli were presented at three signal-to-noise ratios (SNR; -5, 0, +5 dB) and in quiet. Stimuli were processed with ideal or nonideal NR, or unprocessed. The effect of NR on response times in HI listeners was significant only in conditions where speech intelligibility was also affected (-5 dB SNR). This is in contrast to the previous results with NH listeners. There was a significant effect of SNR on response times for HI listeners. The response time measure was reasonably correlated (R142 = 0.54) to subjective listening effort and showed a sufficient test-retest reliability. This study thus presents an objective, valid, and reliable measure for evaluating an aspect of listening effort of HI listeners.

Subjective evaluation of single microphone noise reduction with different time constants.

Objective: Previous studies on single microphone noise reduction (NR) in hearing aids (HAs) have shown that some NR algorithms provide beneficial effects in terms of listener preference. To improve HA user satisfaction, we are interested in characteristics that determine preferences for NR, and in the inter-individual variability. The aim of this study was to test if dynamic properties of NR influence listener preference. Design: The gain reduction at speech offsets of a NR algorithm was slowed down by applying temporal exponential smoothing. At speech onsets the gain recovery was left unchanged. Test signals consisted of speech in continuous and modulated speech-shaped background noise, processed with three time constants: 0, 100, and 200 ms. Study sample: 16 Normal hearing (NH) and 16 hearing impaired (HI) subjects participated in a paired-comparison listening test. Results: NH subjects as a group had a significant preference for NR with time constants of 100, or 200 ms (slower acting NR). HI listeners as a group preferred NR over no NR, but had no clear preference for fast or slow NR. Patterns of preference differed between individual listeners. Conclusions: NR dynamics had an impact on individual listener preference and should be considered when optimising HAs.