Berger E H
J Acoust Soc Am. 1986 Jun;79(6):1655-87. doi: 10.1121/1.393228.
The published literature describing three real-ear-attenuation-at-threshold (REAT), nine above-threshold, and four objective methods of measuring hearing protector attenuation is reviewed and analyzed with regard to the accuracy, practicality, and applicability of the various techniques. The analysis indicates that the REAT method is one of the most accurate available techniques since it assesses all of the sound paths to the occluded ear and, depending upon the experimenter's intention, can reflect actual in-use attenuation as well. An artifact in the REAT paradigm is that masking in the occluded ear due to physiological noise can spuriously increase low-frequency (less than or equal to 500 Hz) attenuation, although the error never exceeds approximately 5 dB, regardless of the device, except below 125 Hz. Since the preponderance of available data indicates that attenuation is independent of sound level for intentionally linear protectors, the use of above-threshold procedures to evaluate attenuation is not a necessity. An exception exists in the case of impulsive noises, for which the existing data are not unequivocal with regard to hearing protector response characteristics. Two of the objective methods (acoustical test fixture and microphone in real ear) are considerable time savers. All objective procedures are lacking in their ability to accurately determine the importance of the flanking bone-conduction paths, although some authors have incorporated this feature as a post-measurement correction. The microphone in real-ear approach is suggested to be one of the most promising for future standardization efforts and research purposes, and the acoustical test fixture technique is recommended (with certain reservations) for quality control and buyer acceptance testing.
本文回顾并分析了已发表的文献,这些文献描述了三种阈值处真实耳衰减(REAT)、九种阈值以上以及四种测量听力保护器衰减的客观方法,涉及各种技术的准确性、实用性和适用性。分析表明,REAT方法是现有最准确的技术之一,因为它评估了通向被堵塞耳朵的所有声音路径,并且根据实验者的意图,还可以反映实际使用中的衰减。REAT范式中的一个假象是,由于生理噪声导致的被堵塞耳朵中的掩蔽会虚假地增加低频(小于或等于500Hz)衰减,尽管无论使用何种设备,除了在125Hz以下,误差从未超过约5dB。由于现有数据表明,对于有意设计为线性的保护器,衰减与声级无关,因此使用阈值以上程序来评估衰减并非必要。在脉冲噪声的情况下存在例外,对于脉冲噪声,现有数据在听力保护器响应特性方面并不明确。其中两种客观方法(声学测试夹具和真耳中的麦克风)可节省大量时间。所有客观程序都缺乏准确确定侧面骨传导路径重要性的能力,尽管一些作者已将此特征作为测量后的校正。真耳中的麦克风方法被认为是未来标准化努力和研究目的最有前景的方法之一,声学测试夹具技术(有一定保留)被推荐用于质量控制和买家验收测试。