Speech Perception with Noise Vocoding and Background Noise: An EEG and Behavioral Study
JARO - Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, ISSN: 1438-7573, Vol: 22, Issue: 3, Page: 349-363
2021
- 4Citations
- 11Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations4
- Citation Indexes4
- Captures11
- Readers11
- 11
Article Description
This study explored the physiological response of the human brain to degraded speech syllables. The degradation was introduced using noise vocoding and/or background noise. The goal was to identify physiological features of auditory-evoked potentials (AEPs) that may explain speech intelligibility. Ten human subjects with normal hearing participated in syllable-detection tasks, while their AEPs were recorded with 32-channel electroencephalography. Subjects were presented with six syllables in the form of consonant-vowel-consonant or vowel-consonant-vowel. Noise vocoding with 22 or 4 frequency channels was applied to the syllables. When examining the peak heights in the AEPs (P1, N1, and P2), vocoding alone showed no consistent effect. P1 was not consistently reduced by background noise, N1 was sometimes reduced by noise, and P2 was almost always highly reduced. Two other physiological metrics were examined: (1) classification accuracy of the syllables based on AEPs, which indicated whether AEPs were distinguishable for different syllables, and (2) cross-condition correlation of AEPs (r) between the clean and degraded speech, which indicated the brain’s ability to extract speech-related features and suppress response to noise. Both metrics decreased with degraded speech quality. We further tested if the two metrics can explain cross-subject variations in their behavioral performance. A significant correlation existed for r, as well as classification based on early AEPs, in the fronto-central areas. Because r indicates similarities between clean and degraded speech, our finding suggests that high speech intelligibility may be a result of the brain’s ability to ignore noise in the sound carrier and/or background.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85104564886&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10162-021-00787-2; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33851289; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10162-021-00787-2; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10162-021-00787-2; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10162-021-00787-2
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know