Hendrik Christiaan Stronks, Annemijn Laura Tops, Kwong Wing Quach, Jeroen Johannes Briaire, Johan Hubertus Maria Frijns
{"title":"使用瞳孔测量法测量人工耳蜗使用者的聆听努力程度取决于声级,但不取决于使用矩阵测试时的信噪比。","authors":"Hendrik Christiaan Stronks, Annemijn Laura Tops, Kwong Wing Quach, Jeroen Johannes Briaire, Johan Hubertus Maria Frijns","doi":"10.1097/AUD.0000000000001529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We investigated whether listening effort is dependent on task difficulty for cochlear implant (CI) users when using the Matrix speech-in-noise test. To this end, we measured peak pupil dilation (PPD) at a wide range of signal to noise ratios (SNR) by systematically changing the noise level at a constant speech level, and vice versa.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A group of mostly elderly CI users performed the Dutch/Flemish Matrix test in quiet and in multitalker babble at different SNRs. SNRs were set relative to the speech-recognition threshold (SRT), namely at SRT, and 5 and 10 dB above SRT (0 dB, +5 dB, and +10 dB re SRT). The latter 2 conditions were obtained by either varying speech level (at a fixed noise level of 60 dBA) or by varying noise level (with a fixed speech level). We compared these PPDs with those of a group of typical hearing (TH) listeners. In addition, listening effort was assessed with subjective ratings on a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PPD for the CI group did not significantly depend on SNR, whereas SNR significantly affected PPDs for TH listeners. Subjective effort ratings depended significantly on SNR for both groups. For CI users, PPDs were significantly larger, and effort was rated higher when speech was varied, and noise was fixed for CI users. By contrast, for TH listeners effort ratings were significantly higher and performance scores lower when noise was varied, and speech was fixed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The lack of a significant effect of varying SNR on PPD suggests that the Matrix test may not be a feasible speech test for measuring listening effort with pupillometric measures for CI users. A rating test appeared more promising in this population, corroborating earlier reports that subjective measures may reflect different dimensions of listening effort than pupil dilation. Establishing the SNR by varying speech or noise level can have subtle, but significant effects on measures of listening effort, and these effects can differ between TH listeners and CI users.</p>","PeriodicalId":55172,"journal":{"name":"Ear and Hearing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486951/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Listening Effort Measured With Pupillometry in Cochlear Implant Users Depends on Sound Level, But Not on the Signal to Noise Ratio When Using the Matrix Test.\",\"authors\":\"Hendrik Christiaan Stronks, Annemijn Laura Tops, Kwong Wing Quach, Jeroen Johannes Briaire, Johan Hubertus Maria Frijns\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/AUD.0000000000001529\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We investigated whether listening effort is dependent on task difficulty for cochlear implant (CI) users when using the Matrix speech-in-noise test. To this end, we measured peak pupil dilation (PPD) at a wide range of signal to noise ratios (SNR) by systematically changing the noise level at a constant speech level, and vice versa.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A group of mostly elderly CI users performed the Dutch/Flemish Matrix test in quiet and in multitalker babble at different SNRs. SNRs were set relative to the speech-recognition threshold (SRT), namely at SRT, and 5 and 10 dB above SRT (0 dB, +5 dB, and +10 dB re SRT). The latter 2 conditions were obtained by either varying speech level (at a fixed noise level of 60 dBA) or by varying noise level (with a fixed speech level). We compared these PPDs with those of a group of typical hearing (TH) listeners. In addition, listening effort was assessed with subjective ratings on a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PPD for the CI group did not significantly depend on SNR, whereas SNR significantly affected PPDs for TH listeners. Subjective effort ratings depended significantly on SNR for both groups. For CI users, PPDs were significantly larger, and effort was rated higher when speech was varied, and noise was fixed for CI users. By contrast, for TH listeners effort ratings were significantly higher and performance scores lower when noise was varied, and speech was fixed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The lack of a significant effect of varying SNR on PPD suggests that the Matrix test may not be a feasible speech test for measuring listening effort with pupillometric measures for CI users. A rating test appeared more promising in this population, corroborating earlier reports that subjective measures may reflect different dimensions of listening effort than pupil dilation. Establishing the SNR by varying speech or noise level can have subtle, but significant effects on measures of listening effort, and these effects can differ between TH listeners and CI users.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ear and Hearing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486951/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ear and Hearing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001529\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ear and Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001529","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究目的我们研究了人工耳蜗(CI)用户在使用 Matrix 噪声中语音测试时,听力是否取决于任务难度。为此,我们通过在语音水平不变的情况下系统地改变噪音水平,测量了在各种信噪比(SNR)下的瞳孔放大峰值(PPD),反之亦然:设计:一组主要由老年 CI 用户组成的小组在不同信噪比下,分别在安静和多人咿呀学语的环境中进行荷兰语/秽语矩阵测试。信噪比是相对于语音识别阈值(SRT)设定的,即在 SRT 时,以及高于 SRT 5 分贝和 10 分贝时(SRT 为 0 分贝、+5 分贝和+10 分贝)。后两种情况是通过改变语音水平(固定噪音水平为 60 dBA)或改变噪音水平(语音水平固定)获得的。我们将这些PPD与一组典型听力(TH)听者的PPD进行了比较。此外,我们还采用李克特量表对听力努力程度进行了主观评分:结果:CI 组的 PPD 与信噪比无明显关系,而信噪比对 TH 听者的 PPD 有明显影响。两组听者的主观听力评分都明显取决于信噪比。对于 CI 使用者来说,当语音变化时,PPD 明显增大,而对于 CI 使用者来说,噪音固定时,努力程度评分更高。与此相反,对于 TH 听者来说,当噪音变化而语音固定时,努力程度评分明显较高,表现评分较低:不同的信噪比对 PPD 没有明显影响,这表明矩阵测试可能不是一个可行的语音测试,无法用瞳孔测量法测量 CI 用户的听力努力程度。在这一人群中,评分测试似乎更有前途,这也证实了之前的报道,即主观测量可能会反映出与瞳孔放大不同的听力强度。通过改变语音或噪音水平来确定信噪比,可能会对听力强度的测量产生微妙但显著的影响,而且这些影响在 TH 听者和 CI 使用者之间可能会有所不同。
Listening Effort Measured With Pupillometry in Cochlear Implant Users Depends on Sound Level, But Not on the Signal to Noise Ratio When Using the Matrix Test.
Objectives: We investigated whether listening effort is dependent on task difficulty for cochlear implant (CI) users when using the Matrix speech-in-noise test. To this end, we measured peak pupil dilation (PPD) at a wide range of signal to noise ratios (SNR) by systematically changing the noise level at a constant speech level, and vice versa.
Design: A group of mostly elderly CI users performed the Dutch/Flemish Matrix test in quiet and in multitalker babble at different SNRs. SNRs were set relative to the speech-recognition threshold (SRT), namely at SRT, and 5 and 10 dB above SRT (0 dB, +5 dB, and +10 dB re SRT). The latter 2 conditions were obtained by either varying speech level (at a fixed noise level of 60 dBA) or by varying noise level (with a fixed speech level). We compared these PPDs with those of a group of typical hearing (TH) listeners. In addition, listening effort was assessed with subjective ratings on a Likert scale.
Results: PPD for the CI group did not significantly depend on SNR, whereas SNR significantly affected PPDs for TH listeners. Subjective effort ratings depended significantly on SNR for both groups. For CI users, PPDs were significantly larger, and effort was rated higher when speech was varied, and noise was fixed for CI users. By contrast, for TH listeners effort ratings were significantly higher and performance scores lower when noise was varied, and speech was fixed.
Conclusions: The lack of a significant effect of varying SNR on PPD suggests that the Matrix test may not be a feasible speech test for measuring listening effort with pupillometric measures for CI users. A rating test appeared more promising in this population, corroborating earlier reports that subjective measures may reflect different dimensions of listening effort than pupil dilation. Establishing the SNR by varying speech or noise level can have subtle, but significant effects on measures of listening effort, and these effects can differ between TH listeners and CI users.
期刊介绍:
From the basic science of hearing and balance disorders to auditory electrophysiology to amplification and the psychological factors of hearing loss, Ear and Hearing covers all aspects of auditory and vestibular disorders. This multidisciplinary journal consolidates the various factors that contribute to identification, remediation, and audiologic and vestibular rehabilitation. It is the one journal that serves the diverse interest of all members of this professional community -- otologists, audiologists, educators, and to those involved in the design, manufacture, and distribution of amplification systems. The original articles published in the journal focus on assessment, diagnosis, and management of auditory and vestibular disorders.