Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Individual differences in speech recognition ability: implications for hearing aid selection.

C C Crandell1

  • 1Callier Center for Communication Disorders, University of Texas, Dallas.

Ear and Hearing
|December 1, 1991
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Effects of sound-field frequency modulation amplification on reducing teachers' sound pressure level in the classroom.

Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation·1999
Same author

Reliability issues with the Synthetic Sentence Identification test.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·1998
Same author

Middle ear pressure variation: effect of nitrous oxide.

The Laryngoscope·1997
Same author

Speech recognition in noise by hearing-impaired and noise-masked normal-hearing listeners.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·1995
Same author

Speech recognition in noise by children with minimal degrees of sensorineural hearing loss.

Ear and hearing·1993
Same author

Incidence of excessive/impacted cerumen in individuals with mental retardation: a longitudinal investigation.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·1993
Same journal

Community-Informed Adaptation of a School-Based Hearing Health Intervention: Formative Evaluation for an Effectiveness-Implementation Trial.

Ear and hearing·2026
Same journal

Hearing Difficulty, Health Literacy, and Poorer Health Among Adults in the United States: 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Study.

Ear and hearing·2026
Same journal

Cultural Differences in Listening Environments Between Hispanic and White Non-Hispanic Cochlear Implant Users.

Ear and hearing·2026
Same journal

Detection of Inner Ear Malformations Based on Simple Anatomical Measurements: A Model Approach.

Ear and hearing·2026
Same journal

Avoiding Cisplatin-Related Hearing Loss, Including Implementing Sodium Thiosulfate as Otoprotectant Into Daily Pediatric Clinical Practice: Proceedings Based on Evidence and Expert Opinion From the Ototoxicity Taskforce of the SIOP Supportive Care Network.

Ear and hearing·2026
Same journal

Quantifying Miscommunications in Triadic Conversations: Effects of Hearing Impairment, Hearing Aids, and Background Noise.

Ear and hearing·2026
See all related articles

Hearing-impaired individuals vary in speech understanding despite similar hearing loss. This study explores auditory and cognitive factors influencing speech recognition in noise and reverberation.

Area of Science:

  • Audiology
  • Speech Perception
  • Hearing Science

Background:

  • Hearing-impaired listeners exhibit diverse speech recognition abilities in challenging acoustic environments.
  • Individual differences in susceptibility to noise and reverberation are not fully explained by audiometric configuration alone.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate individual speech recognition performance in noise and reverberation among hearing-impaired listeners.
  • To explore auditory and cognitive hypotheses underlying these performance variations.
  • To discuss implications for hearing aid selection.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing literature on speech recognition in noise and reverberation.
  • Examination of auditory and cognitive theories.
  • Analysis of factors contributing to individual differences.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Significant variability exists in speech recognition abilities among hearing-impaired listeners, even with similar audiograms.
  • Auditory processing deficits and cognitive factors likely contribute to these individual differences.
  • Understanding these factors is crucial for effective hearing rehabilitation.

Conclusions:

  • Individual susceptibility to acoustic challenges impacts hearing aid benefit.
  • Further research into auditory and cognitive mechanisms is needed for personalized hearing aid fitting.
  • This knowledge can refine hearing aid selection and improve outcomes for hearing-impaired individuals.