School of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, San Diego State University.
Qualcomm Institute of Calit2, University of California, San Diego.
Trends Hear. 2020 Jan-Dec;24:2331216520930545. doi: 10.1177/2331216520930545.
While listening to recorded sentences with a sound-field level of 65 dB SPL, 24 adults with hearing-aid experience used the "Goldilocks" explore-and-select procedure to adjust level and spectrum of amplified speech to preference. All participants started adjustment from the same generic response. Amplification was provided by a custom-built Master Hearing Aid with online processing of microphone input. Primary goals were to assess the effects of including a formal speech-perception test between repeated self-adjustments and of adding multitalker babble (signal-to-noise ratio +6 dB) during self-adjustment. The speech test did not affect group-mean self-adjusted output, which was close to the National Acoustics Laboratories' prescription for Non-Linear hearing aids. Individuals, however, showed a wide range of deviations from this prescription. Extreme deviations at the first self-adjustment fell by a small but significant amount at the second. The multitalker babble had negligible effect on group-mean self-selected output but did have predictable effects on word recognition in sentences and on participants' opinion regarding the most important subjective criterion guiding self-adjustment. Phoneme recognition in monosyllabic words was better with the generic starting response than without amplification and improved further after self-adjustment. The findings continue to support the efficacy of hearing aid self-fitting, at least for level and spectrum. They do not support the need for inclusion of a formal speech-perception test, but they do support the value of completing more than one self-adjustment. Group-mean data did not indicate a need for threshold-based prescription as a starting point for self-adjustment.
当 24 名有听力辅助器使用经验的成年人使用“ Goldilocks”探索-选择程序，将声音场水平调至 65dB SPL 并调整放大语音的水平和频谱以符合个人偏好时，他们正在聆听录制的句子。所有参与者都从相同的通用响应开始调整。放大由定制的 Master 助听器通过麦克风输入的在线处理提供。主要目标是评估在重复自我调整之间包括正式语音感知测试以及在自我调整期间添加多说话者杂音（信噪比+6dB）的效果。该语音测试并未影响组平均的自我调整输出，该输出接近非线性助听器的国家声学实验室处方。然而，个体显示出与该处方广泛的偏差。在第一次自我调整时的极端偏差在第二次时会有小但显著的减少。多说话者杂音对组平均自我选择输出的影响可以忽略不计，但对句子中的单词识别以及参与者对指导自我调整的最重要主观标准的看法有可预测的影响。在单音节单词中的音位识别，在使用通用起始响应时比没有放大时要好，并且在自我调整后进一步提高。这些发现继续支持听力辅助器自我适配的功效，至少在水平和频谱方面是如此。它们不支持包括正式语音感知测试的必要性，但支持完成多次自我调整的价值。组平均数据表明，不需要基于阈值的处方作为自我调整的起点。
