针对听力损失程度范围广泛的参与者，比较CAM2A和NAL-NL2助听器验配方法。
Comparison of the CAM2A and NAL-NL2 hearing-aid fitting methods for participants with a wide range of hearing losses.
作者信息
Moore Brian C J, Sęk Aleksander
机构信息
a Department of Experimental Psychology , University of Cambridge , Downing Street , Cambridge , UK and.
b Institute of Acoustics, Faculty of Physics, Adam Mickiewicz University , Poznań , Poland.
出版信息
Int J Audiol. 2016;55(2):93-100. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1095360. Epub 2015 Oct 15.
OBJECTIVE
To compare preferences for sounds processed via a simulated five-channel compression hearing aid fitted using CAM2A and NAL-NL2.
DESIGN
Within a trial, the same segment of sound was presented twice, once with CAM2A settings and once with NAL-NL2 settings, in random order. The participant indicated which one was preferred and by how much. Stimuli included female and male speech in quiet and four types of music. The compression speed was slow or fast and the input sound level was 50, 65, or 80 dB SPL.
STUDY SAMPLE
Sixteen experienced hearing-aid users with a wide range of sensorineural hearing losses.
RESULTS
For both compression speeds, CAM2A was slightly preferred over NAL-NL2 for input levels of 65 and 80 dB, but NAL-NL2 was slightly preferred at 50 dB SPL.
CONCLUSIONS
Preferences for CAM2A relative to NAL-NL2 vary with input level. The results suggest that preferences for CAM2A might be increased by using lower gains for high frequencies and low input levels.
目的
比较使用CAM2A和NAL-NL2适配的模拟五通道压缩式助听器处理声音的偏好。
设计
在一项试验中，同一段声音以随机顺序呈现两次，一次采用CAM2A设置，一次采用NAL-NL2设置。参与者指出更喜欢哪一种以及偏好程度如何。刺激声音包括安静环境下的女性和男性语音以及四种类型的音乐。压缩速度分为慢或快，输入声级为50、65或80 dB SPL。
研究样本
16名有各种感音神经性听力损失的经验丰富的助听器使用者。
结果
对于两种压缩速度，在输入声级为65和80 dB时，相对于NAL-NL2，参与者略微更喜欢CAM2A，但在50 dB SPL时略微更喜欢NAL-NL2。
结论
相对于NAL-NL2，对CAM2A的偏好随输入声级而变化。结果表明，通过对高频和低输入声级使用较低增益，对CAM2A的偏好可能会增加。
Zotero 插件