La percepción del habla en ruidoun reto para la lingüística y para la evaluación audiológica (estudio experimental)

  1. Victoria Marrero-Aguiar 1
  1. 1 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
    info

    Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02msb5n36

Revista:
Revista Española de Lingüística
  1. Gil Fernández, Juana (ed. lit.)
  2. San Segundo, Eugenia (ed. lit.)

ISSN: 2254-8769

Ano de publicación: 2015

Título do exemplar: Percepción del habla

Volume: 45

Fascículo: 1

Páxinas: 129-151

Tipo: Artigo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Outras publicacións en: Revista Española de Lingüística

Resumo

En este trabajo se presentan los resultados de un proyecto de investigación entre el Programa Infantil Phonak y la UNED, cuyo objetivo fue desarrollar materiales para evaluar la capacidad para discriminar el habla en ruido por parte de niños con pérdida auditiva. En ese marco, se aborda la relación entre inteligibilidad del habla (tanto en estilo normal como en habla hiperarticulada, consecuencia del llamado efecto Lombard) y la discriminabilidad de la señal en el ruido producido por personas hablando simultáneamente (multi-speaker babble noise). Hemos contado con dos grupos de sujetos, el de control, 40 niños con audición normal, y el experimental, 23 niños con hipoacusia, diferenciando, en este último, los que sufren una pérdida severa de los que la sufren profunda, y los que cuentan con prótesis auditivas o implante único implante y los que cuentan con implantación binaural, que obtuvieron más beneficios del habla hiperarticulada incluso que el grupo de control. Finalmente, se consideran los resultados en relación con la percepción multimodal del habla y la lectura labial en la hipoacusia

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Armstrong, M., Pegg, P., James, C. y Blamey, P. (1997): «Speech perception in noise with implant and hearing aid», The American Journal of Otology 18, 6, S140-S14.
  • Barutchu A., Danaher, J., Crewther, S.G., Innes-Brown, H., Shivdasani, M.N. y Paolini, A.G. (2010): «Audiovisual integration in noise by children and adults», Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 105, 1-2, pp. 38-50.
  • Başkent, D. y Bazo, D. (2011):«Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment», Ear & hearing 32, 5, pp. 582-592.
  • Bentler, R. A., Palmer, C. y Dittberner, A. B. (2004). «Hearing-in-noise: Comparison of listeners with normal and (aided) impaired hearing», Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 15, 3, pp. 216-225.
  • Bradlow, A.R. y Alexander, J.A. (2007): «Semantic and phonetic enhancements for speech-in-noise recognition by native and non-native listeners», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121, 4, pp. 2339-2349.
  • Bronkhorst, A.W. (2000): «The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions», Acustica 86, pp. 117-128
  • Brown, K.D. y Balkany, T.J. (2007): «Benefits of bilateral cochlear implantation: a review», Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery 15, 5, pp. 315-318.
  • Brumm, H. y Zollinger, S.A. (2011): «The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research», Behaviour 148, pp. 11-13.
  • Brungart, D.S. (2001): «Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, 3, pp. 1101-1109
  • Cárdenas, M.R. y Marrero, V. (1994): Cuaderno de logoaudiometría, Madrid, UNED.
  • Carlo, A. (2009). «A review of the effects of bilingualism on speech recognition performance», Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders: Research and Diagnosis 13, pp. 14-20.
  • Castellanos, A., Benedi, J.M. y Casacuberta, F. (1996): «An analysis of general acoustic phonetic features for Spanish speech produced with the Lombard effect», Speech Communication 20, pp. 23-35.
  • Cherry, E.C. (1953): «Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears.» The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25(5), pp. 975-979
  • Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics and Biomechanics (CHABA) (1988): «Speech understanding and aging», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83, pp. 859-820.
  • Cooke, M., García Lecumberri, M.L. y Barker, J. (2008) «The foreign language cocktail party problem: Energetic and informational masking effects in nonnative speech perception», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123, 1, pp. 414-427.
  • Crandell, C. y Smaldino, J. (1996): «Sound field amplification in the classroom: Applied and theoretical issues», Bess F. , Gravel J. y Tharpe A. (eds.), Amplification for children with auditory deficits, Nashville, TN, Bill Wilkerson Center Press, pp. 229–250.
  • Cunningham J., Nicol, T., Zecker, S.G., Bradlow, A. y Kraus, N. (2001): «Neurobiologic responses to speech in noise in children with learning problems: dificits and strategies for improvement», Clinical Neurophysiology 112, pp. 758-767.
  • Dirks, D.D., y Bower, D.R. (1969): Masking effects of speech competing messages. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 12, 2, pp. 229-245.
  • Dunn, C.C., Noble, W., Tyler, R.S., Kordus, M., Gantz, B.J. y Ji, H. (2010): «Bilateral and unilateral cochlear implant users compared on speech perception in noise», Ear & hearing 312, pp. 296-298.
  • Erber, N.P. (1969): «Interaction of audition and vision in the recognition of oral speech stimuli», Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 12, pp. 423-425.
  • Fallon, M. (2001): «Children’s perception of speech in noise». Tesis doctoral de la Universidad de Toronto.
  • Feliciani, L. (2011): Characterization of the features of clear speech: an acoustic analysis of the influence of speech processing settings in cochlear implants, Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Milán.
  • Freyman, R.L., Balakrishnan, U. y Helfer, K. S. (2001): «Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, 5, pp. 2112-2122.
  • García Lecumberri, M.L. y Cooke, M. (2006): «Effect of masker type on native and non-native consonant perception in noise», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119, pp. 2445-2454.
  • —, y Cutler, A. (2010): «Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: A review», Speech Communication 52, 11, pp. 864-886.
  • Gat, I.B. y Keith, R.W. (1978): «An effect of linguistic experience. Auditory word discrimination by native and non-native speakers of English», Audiology 17, pp. 339-345
  • Gentner, T. y Ball, G. (2006): «A neuroethological perspective», en Pisoni, D. y Remez, R. (eds.), The handbook of speech perception, Malden, MA,WileyBlackwell, pp. 653-675.
  • Giraud, A.L., Garnier, S., Micheyl, C., Lina, G., Chays, A. y Chery Croze, S. (1997):«Auditory efferents involved in speech-in-noise intelligibility», Neuroreport 8, 7, pp. 1779-1783.
  • Grant, K.W. y Seitz, P.F. (1998): Measures of auditory–visual integration in nonsense syllables and sentences, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104(4), pp. 2438-2450.
  • Grant K.W. y Seitz, P.F. (2000): «The use of visible speech cues for improving auditory detection of spoken sentences», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 108, 3, pp. 1197-1208.
  • Grant, K.W. (2001), «The effect of speechreading on masked detection thresholds for filtered speech», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, pp. 2272-2275.
  • Hall, J.W., Grose, J.H., Buss, E., y Dev, M.B. (2002). Spondee recognition in a two-talker masker and a speech-shaped noise masker in adults and children. Ear and Hearing, 23(2), pp. 159-165.
  • Helfer, K.S. y Freyman, R.L. (2005): «The role of visual speech cues in reducing energetic and informational masking», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 117, 2, pp. 842-849.
  • Hoen, M., Meunier, F., Grataloup, C.L., Pellegrino, F., Grimault, N., Perrin, F.,... y Collet, L. (2007), «Phonetic and lexical interferences in informational masking during speech-in-speech comprehension», Speech Communication 49, 12, pp. 905-916.
  • Justicia, F. (1995): El desarrollo del vocabulario. Diccionario de frecuencias, Granada, Universidad de Granada.
  • Kawase, T. y Liberman, M.C. (1993): «Antimasking effects of the olivocochlear reflex. I. Enhancement of compound action potentials to masked tones», Journal of Neurophysiology 70, 6, pp. 2519-2532.
  • Kawase, T., Delgutte, B. y Liberman, M. C. (1993a): «Antimasking effects of the olivocochlear reflex. II. Enhancement of auditory-nerve response to masked tones», Journal of Neurophysiology 70, 6, pp. 2533-2549.
  • Killion, M.C., Niquette; P.A., Gudmundsen; G.I., Revit; L.J. y Banerjee, S. (2006): «Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119, 3, pp. 2395-2405.
  • Kim, S.H., Frisina, R.D. y Frisina, D.R. (2006): «Effects of age on speech understanding in normal hearing listeners: Relationship between the auditory efferent system and speech intelligibility in noise», Speech Communication 48, 7, pp. 855-862.
  • Kuhl, P.K., y meltzoff, A.N. (1982): «The bimodal perception of speech in infancy». Science, 218, 4577, pp. 1138-1141.
  • Kumar, U.A. y Vanaja, C.S. (2004): «Functioning of olivocochlear bundle and speech perception in noise», Ear & Hearing 25, 2, pp. 142-146.
  • Lane, H. (1963): «Foreign accent and speech distortion», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 35, 4, 45.
  • Lindblom, B. (1996): «Role of articulation in speech perception: Clues from production», The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99, 3, pp. 1683-1692.
  • Ma, W.J., Zhou, X., Ross, L.A., Foxe, J.J., y Parra, L.C. (2009): «Lip-reading aids word recognition most in moderate noise: a Bayesian explanation using highdimensional feature space», PLoS One, 4, 3, e4638.
  • Liu, S., Del Rio, E., Bradlow, A.R. y Zeng, F.G. (2004): «Clear speech perception in acoustic and electric hearing», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 116, 4, pp. 2374-2383.
  • Lombard, É. (1911): «Le signe de l’élévation de la voix», Annales des Maladies de l’Oreille et du Larynx, 37, 2 2, pp. 101-9.
  • Macleod, A. y Summerfield, Q. (1987): «Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise», British Journal of Audiology 212, pp. 131-141.
  • Maggio De Maggi, M., Marrero-Aguiar V. y Calvo, J.C. (en prensa): «Material para la evaluación de la percepción del habla en ruido en niños. Frases PIPUNED», Actas del X Congreso de la Asociación Española de Audiología, Sevilla, 3-4 de mayo de 2013.
  • Mani, N. y Schneider, S. (2012): «Speaker identity supports phonetic category learning», Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 39, 3, p. 623.
  • Mayo, L.H., Florentine, M. y Buus, S. (1997): «Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise», Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 40, pp. 686-693.
  • Marrero-Aguiar, V. (2008): «La fonética perceptiva: trascendencia lingüística de mecanismos neuropsicofisiológicos», Estudios de Fonética Experimental 17, pp. 207-245.
  • Marrero-Aguiar, V. y Cárdenas, M.R. (2012): «Audiometría verbal», Salesa, E. y Perelló J. (eds.)Tratado de Audiología. Barcelona, Masson, pp. 103-125.
  • Marrero-Aguiar, V., Rodríguez Cruz, M. e Igualada Pérez, A. (2013): «Los efectos del ruido sobre la percepción del habla. Aplicaciones audiométricas», en Penas Ibáñez, M.A. (ed.), Panorama de la fonética española actual, Madrid, Arco/Libros, pp. 367-400.
  • McArdle, R.A., Wilson, R.H. y Burks, C.A. (2005): «Speech recognition in multitalker babble using digits, words and sentences», Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 16, pp. 726-739.
  • McGurk, H. y MacDonald, J. (1976): «Hearing lips and seeing voices», Nature 264, pp. 746-748.
  • Moreno Sandoval, A., Toledano, D.T., Curto, N., y Torre, R.D.L. (2006): «Inventario de frecuencias fonémicas y silábicas del castellano espontáneo y escrito», en Buera, L., Lleida, E., Miguel, A. y Ortega, A. (eds.), IV Jornadas en Tecnología del Habla, Zaragoza, Universidad de Zaragoza, pp. 77-81.
  • Muchnik C., Ari-Even Roth, D.E., Othman-Jebara, R., Putter-Katz, H., Shabtai, E. L. e Hildesheimer, M. (2004): «Reduced medial olivocochlear bundle system function in children with auditory processing disorders», Audiology and Neuro-otology 9, pp. 107-114.
  • Namba, S., Kuwano, S. y Schick, A. (1986): «A cross-cultural study on noise problems», Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan 7, 5, pp. 279-288.
  • Parikh, G., y Loizou, P.C. (2005): «The influence of noise on vowel and consonant cues», The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118, 6, pp. 3874-3888.
  • Patel, R. y Schell, K. (2008): «The Influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect», Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 51, pp. 209-220.
  • Rajan, R. y Cainer, K.E. (2008): «Ageing without hearing loss or cognitive impairment causes a decrease in speech intelligibility only in informational maskers», Neuroscience 154, pp. 784-495.
  • Rhebergen, K.S., Versfeld, N.J., y Dreschler, W.A. (2005): «Release from informational masking by time reversal of native and non-native interfering speech», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118, pp. 1274–1277
  • Sandoval, A.M., Toledano, D.T., Curto, N. y de la Torre, R. (2006): «Inventario de frecuencias fonémicas y silábicas del castellano espontáneo y escrito», IV Jornadas en tecnologia del habla, Zaragoza, .
  • Schneider, B.A., Li, L. y Daneman, M. (2007): «How competing speech interferences with speech comprehension in everyday listening situations», Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 18, pp. 478-591.
  • Shield, B.M. y Dockrell, J. E. (2003): «The effects of noise on children at school: a review», Building Acoustics 102, pp. 97-116.
  • Schwartz, J.L., Berthommier, F., y Savariaux, C. (2004): «Seeing to hear better: Evidence for early audio-visual interactions in speech identification», Cognition, 93, 2, B69-B78.
  • Smiljanić, R. y Bradlow, A.R. (2009): «Speaking and hearing clearly: Talker and listener factors in speaking style changes», Language and Linguistics Compass 3, 1, pp. 236-264.
  • Sumby, W.H y Pollack I. (1954): «Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 26, 2, pp. 212-215.
  • Taylor, B. (2003): «Speech-in-noise tests. How and why to include them in your basic test battery», The hearing journal 56, 1, pp. 40-44.
  • Tillman, T.W., Carhart, R., y Olsen, W.O. (1970): «Hearing aid efficiency in a competing speech situation», Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 13(4), pp. 789-811.
  • Tyler, R.S., Parkinson, A.J., Wilson, B.S., Witt, S., Preece, J.P. y Noble, W. (2002): «Patients utilizing a hearing aid and a cochlear implant: Speech perception and localization», Ear & Hearing 23, 2, pp. 98-105.
  • Van Engen, K.J., y Bradlow, A.R. (2007): «Sentence recognition in native-and foreign-language multi-talker background noisea)», The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121, 1, pp. 519-526
  • Van Rooij, J.C.G.M. y Plomp, R. (1990): «Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II: Multivariate analyses», Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 88, 6, pp. 2611-2624.
  • Wackym, P.A., Runge-Samuelson, C.L., Firszt, J.B., Alkaf, F.M. y Burg, L.S. (2007): «More challenging speech-perception tasks demonstrate binaural benefit in bilateral cochlear implant users», Ear & Hearing 282, pp. 80s-85s.
Fonte de datos: Dialnet