American Journal of Audiology最新文献

{"title":"Predicting Real-World Remote Microphone Speech Perception Performance Through Simulated Electroacoustic Verification.","authors":"Mohamed Rahme, Grace Moir, Vahid Ashkanichenarlogh, Abigail Naus, Angela Sanchez, Paula Folkeard, Matthew Holden, Kristin Nugent, John Mianzhong Wang, Vijay Parsa, Susan Scollie","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00292","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate remote microphone performance across three hearing aid brands using various simulated electroacoustic verification methods to optimize speech perception outcomes in a real-world environment.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study was conducted using manikin recordings at varying azimuth angles between a simulated talker and listeners at a real-world gymnasium and employing a predictive speech perception metric (Hearing Aid Speech Perception Index). The listener manikins were programmed to simulate mild, sloping hearing loss and fitted with three brands of premium receiver-in-canal hearing aids, including their respective proprietary remote microphones (both low and high technology levels). Remote microphones were verified electroacoustically in a test box for transparency and maximum audible output frequency (MAOF), alongside signal-processing features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Remote microphone verification using MAOF was a strong predictor of remote microphone performance in the real-world gymnasium. Furthermore, remote microphones consistently produced higher speech perception scores relative to hearing aids alone across all brands, regardless of the factor of azimuth.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Remote microphone verification using MAOF, alongside the recommended transparency approach, can support optimal real-world performance. Future behavioral assessments of remote microphones in real-world environments with individuals with hearing loss are discussed.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32065932.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147787219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patient-Centered Hearing Intervention Leads to Positive Outcomes: The Association of Hearing Technology With Daily Hearing Aid Usage and Listening Goals in the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Study.","authors":"Victoria A Sanchez, Emmanuel E Garcia Morales, Michelle L Arnold, Haley N Neil Calloway, Sarah Faucette, Adele M Goman, Alison R Huang, Christine M Mitchell, Nicholas S Reed, Laura Sherry, Jacqueline M Weycker, Theresa H Chisolm","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00229","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Purpose: &lt;/strong&gt;This study describes the patient-centered approach to hearing technology selection and fitting of the participants randomized to a best practice hearing intervention as part of the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03243422). We evaluated associations between hearing technology with daily hours of hearing aid use and listening and communication goal achievement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method: &lt;/strong&gt;The ACHIEVE study (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 977) was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial designed to test the effect of a best practice hearing intervention versus health education control on cognitive decline over 3 years among older adults with untreated hearing loss. Participants were aged 70-84 years, had adult-onset mild-to-moderate hearing loss, had no previous hearing aid use, and were without substantial cognitive impairment at baseline. Participants randomized to the hearing intervention (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 490) received a patient-centered comprehensive hearing program including hearing aids with varying feature sets, characterized as &lt;i&gt;standard&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;advanced&lt;/i&gt;, and &lt;i&gt;premium&lt;/i&gt; technology levels, and offered at least one hearing-assistive technology (HAT). The Client-Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) was used to identify listening needs that guided intervention delivery and was used to assess attainment of hearing-related goals following ~10-week intervention period. Hearing aid datalogging was used to measure hours of daily wear. We estimated the association between hearing aid technology level, HATs, hours of wear, and COSI goal attainment using an ordered logistic model adjusting for auditory and sociodemographic characteristics. Proportionality odds assumption was checked for all models.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;A total of 459 participants completed the hearing intervention and reported outcomes. Selection of hearing aid technology level and HATs was guided through evidence-based protocol-directed recommendations, with 88 (19%) participants receiving standard; 260 (57%) participants, advanced; and 111 (24%) participants, premium hearing aid technology. Mean daily hours of hearing aid use was high (&lt;i&gt;M&lt;/i&gt; = 9.3 hr across all participants) and did not differ between hearing technology (levels or HATs). Participant COSI goals, which included categories such as conversation in noise and in quiet or attending church and/or meetings, improved and were not dependent on technology used. Participants benefited from patient-centered hearing intervention, and there were no statistically significant associations among hearing aid technology level, HATs, hours of use, and change in COSI goals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;The patient-centered selection of hearing technology used in the ACHIEVE study resulted in high levels of hearing aid and HAT usage, along with positive COSI listening goal attainment for the majority of participants. Carefully assessed","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147787215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Characterizing Auditory Deficits in Veterans With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Principal Component Analysis Approach.","authors":"Tess K Koerner, Melissa A Papesh, Frederick J Gallun","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00253","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00253","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>There is currently no consensus regarding an evidence-based assessment protocol for normal-hearing patients with a history of brain injury who report auditory difficulties. This work used a large test battery to identify measures that explained the most variability across participants with and without a history of head injury, to determine relationships between measures, and to explore patterns of performance across participants, with the aim of identifying measures that should be considered in future research on developing clinical assessment protocols for this unique patient population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A principal component analysis was conducted on data from 22 self-report, central auditory processing, and cognitive processing measures completed by a sample of 95 participants. Participants included Veterans with a history of blast exposure, Veterans with a history of nonblast mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), and a sample of control participants with no history of head injury.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Several central auditory processing and self-report measures explained variance in the data set. However, analyses revealed that performance on the behavioral auditory processing tests was not predictive of self-reported auditory and non-auditory symptom severity. A cluster analysis further revealed spread in performance across participants with a history of blast exposure or nonblast mTBI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results from the current study underscore the need for a comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care for those with a history of head injury. The measures identified in the current analysis should be investigated in future studies that aim to develop an auditory assessment protocol for this patient population.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32060232.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147787249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Expert Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots for Central Auditory Processing Disorder Information.","authors":"Alyssa J Davidson, W Wiktor Jedrzejczak, Jennifer McCullagh, Jeanane M Ferre, Amy Bradbury, Shannon B Palmer, Vasiliki M Iliadou, Frank E Musiek","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00224","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00224","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots based on large language models (LLMs) can deliver medical information, but their performance on specialized topics such as central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) remains unexplored. This study evaluated the accuracy and completeness of three AI chatbots (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude) in providing CAPD-related information across varying levels of question complexity.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Forty-four questions, categorized into four difficulty levels (patient level, easy, intermediate, and specialized; <i>n</i> = 11 each), were submitted to each chatbot, generating 132 responses. Seven clinical experts, blinded to chatbot identity, independently rated accuracy and completeness on a 1-5 Likert scale. Data were analyzed with analyses of variance, correlations, and interrater comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Chatbot performance was similar, with mean accuracy below 4.0 and completeness about 3.5. Complex questions often scored below 3.0 across experts. Only three of the 44 questions, primarily patient level or relatively simple, received consistently high expert ratings (≥ 4 for both accuracy and completeness) across all three chatbots. Performance declined with question difficulty, although differences were not statistically significant. Accuracy and completeness were correlated across chatbots.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current AI chatbots provided generally accurate CAPD information but fell short of clinical standards, particularly on specialized questions. Their limited performance underscores the need for clinician oversight in CAPD assessment and management. Chatbots may serve as helpful adjuncts but should not replace expert evaluation and guidance in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.31975101.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147700478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Daily Cochlear Implant Use Predicts Pitch and Melody Perception in Adolescents With Prelingual Deafness.","authors":"Sevgi Kadihanoglu, Mustafa Yüksel, Merve Ozbal Batuk","doi":"10.1044/2025_AJA-25-00249","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_AJA-25-00249","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While speech outcomes have been extensively studied, limited evidence exists regarding how real-world auditory experience shapes music perception-particularly in adolescents with prelingual deafness. This study aimed to explore the relationship between daily cochlear implant (CI) use, long-term CI experience, and music perception abilities in adolescent CI users.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This cross-sectional study included 24 unilateral adolescent CI users and 12 age-matched peers with normal hearing (NH). Participants completed two music perception tasks: pitch direction discrimination (PDD) and melodic contour identification (MCI). Daily CI use and cumulative CI usage duration (time since implantation) were obtained via data logging and included in the analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CI group demonstrated significantly poorer performance compared with peers with NH on both PDD and MCI tests. Longer daily CI use was moderately associated with better performance on both the PDD and MCI tasks, while total CI experience correlated positively with MCI scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Consistent daily CI use is associated with better performance in both basic pitch discrimination and higher order melodic perception in adolescents. These findings highlight the value of maximizing auditory input not only for speech perception outcomes but also for supporting music-related auditory skills.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147693302","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dual Assessment of Word Recognition and Auditory Working Memory in Older Adults With Hearing Loss: Validation of the Korean Word Recognition and Span Test.","authors":"Sungmin Lee, Soo Jung Lee","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00146","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to validate the Korean Word Recognition and Span Test (K-WRST) in older adults with hearing loss. The K-WRST was developed to simultaneously assess auditory working memory and monosyllabic word recognition using standardized Korean Speech Audiometry materials.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Forty-two older adults (age range: 60-84 years, <i>M</i> = 70.67 years, <i>SD</i> = 6.05) with slight to profound age-related hearing loss participated in this study. The K-WRST was administered under four test conditions, varying by background noise (quiet vs. noise) and recall order (forward vs. backward): quiet-forward (QF), quiet-backward (QB), noise-forward, and noise-backward (NB). Outcome measures included word recognition scores, percent correct recall, and word-recall span. Validation was conducted by examining correlations and regression analyses between K-WRST outcomes and working memory measures, including digit span scores from the Korean Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition and a reference word span test (R-WST).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Word recognition and recall performance were significantly affected by noise, with quiet conditions yielding higher scores. Word-recall span was highest in the QF condition and lowest in the NB condition. Among the four conditions, QB span scores demonstrated the strongest and most consistent correlations with both digit span and R-WST outcomes. Regression analyses identified QB span as the best predictor of working memory outcomes in older adults.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The K-WRST appears to be a valid tool for concurrently assessing word recognition and auditory working memory in older adults with hearing loss. The results underscore the clinical potential of the K-WRST, particularly the QB condition, as a cognitively informative measure in audiological evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147693258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Time Matters: Possible Predictors of the Number of Appointments During the First Year After Hearing Aid Fitting.","authors":"Shannon C McCabe, Kaitlyn Ramirez, Sara Dyer, David Velenovsky, Tom Muller, Megan J Kobel","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00240","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Follow-up care after hearing aid fitting is recommended, yet clinicians lack data on the expected number of follow-up appointments needed and which patients require more support. This study aimed to characterize follow-up service utilization during the first year after hearing aid fitting and to determine whether patient, device, or cost-related factors may predict the number of follow-up appointments.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective chart review was conducted on 223 adult patients who received hearing aids at a university-affiliated audiology clinic between May 2022 and April 2023. Demographic, audiological, device-specific, and cost-related data were extracted. The number of follow-up appointments over 1 year was used as the primary outcome. Negative binomial regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of follow-up service utilization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients attended an average of 4.1 follow-up appointments (range: 1-16), with most attending three to five visits. No significant effects were observed for gender, degree of hearing loss, or language. Effects of age and prior hearing aid experience were identified with older patients and those with over 10 years of prior hearing aid use attending more appointments. Device factors, including dispensing of accessories and dispensing of standard-level technology, were associated with increased follow-up utilization. Patients with higher out-of-pocket (OOP) costs or no insurance coverage attended more appointments, though cost and technology level exhibited interdependencies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, most adult hearing aid patients attended approximately three to five appointments over the first year, and most demographic and audiometric factors did not predict follow-up appointment attendance. However, on average, patients with higher OOP costs and those with an accessory attended more appointments. Clinicians can use these data to provide evidence-based counseling to patients and to inform clinical decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147693292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Parent Questions About Childhood Hearing Loss: An Evaluation of ChatGPT Response Accuracy, Completeness, and Repeatability.","authors":"Karen Muñoz, Tess C Hurd, Danielle Glista, Adam Gavarkovs, John J Whicker, Kylie Hollingsworth, Alan Baker, Meg Singletary, Julia Wind, Sharad Jones, Michael P Twohig","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00081","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to assess the responses to parent questions about childhood hearing loss that were generated by two generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, ChatGPT-4o mini and ChatGPT Professional (Pro).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Sixty-four questions grouped into three categories (hearing loss, hearing aids, and family) were queried in both platforms and rated for accuracy, completeness, readability, and repeatability. Paired-samples <i>t</i> tests were calculated to determine differences in responses between platforms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ChatGPT Pro was judged as more accurate for hearing aids and more complete for questions related to hearing loss and hearing aids compared to ChatGPT-4o mini, and ChatGPT-4o mini responses were judged as more complete compared to ChatGPT Pro for questions related to family (e.g., emotions, talking to others). Readability scores revealed that responses were generally written in a complex manner.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Responses generated on both platforms were generally judged as accurate and complete, suggesting that AI could contribute to supporting parent education needs. Further research is needed to explore strategies for improving the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated responses, including the collection of supplemental information from parent users to guide and/or prompt responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147640432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Acoustics of Electronic Stethoscopes for Health Professionals.","authors":"Samuel R Atcherson, Nancy J Rennert, Sarah J Hein","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00110","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Commercially available electronic stethoscopes for auscultation often report amplification levels and may or may not publish amplitude-frequency (spectral) response curves. Additional data may be helpful to consumers who use stethoscopes in less-than-ideal listening environments or have hearing loss. The purpose of this research was to describe our method for evaluating electronic stethoscopes relative to a nonelectronic stethoscope.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One nonelectronic and eight electronic stethoscopes at maximum volume with their bell and diaphragm modes were acoustically evaluated using digitized heart and breath sounds, a stethoscope speaker pad, and an industry-standard manikin ear simulator. Some electronic stethoscopes had wireless connectivity to wearable Bluetooth earbuds, and these were evaluated also. For each stethoscope, output measurements of digitized heart and breath sounds were recorded in a quiet room. For direct comparisons, measurements were categorized by expected spectra into heart (bell) sounds (~20-500 Hz) and breath (diaphragm) sounds (~100-1000 Hz).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Relative to published human threshold tone and 1/3-octave band data, as well as nonelectronic stethoscope output, all electronic stethoscopes clearly demonstrated some measure of amplification across the amplitude-frequency (spectral) range for digitized normal heart and breath sounds. Differences observed may be specific to bell versus diaphragm modes, acoustical tubing (or lack thereof), wired versus wireless modes, models within the same make, and use of active noise cancellation, to name a few. Importantly, manufacturer-reported amplification values (e.g., \"×\" specifications) did not reliably reflect frequency-specific acoustic output within clinically relevant heart and breath sound regions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The methodology described to analyze stethoscope outputs appears to be an effective starting point for evaluating various characteristics of stethoscopes with a lens toward assisting health professionals and students working in less-than-ideal listening situations or for those with hearing loss. While all electronic stethoscopes evaluated offered amplification, there was great variability in amplitude-frequency responses, which may help inform stethoscope selection based on listening needs, various listening environments, and/or degree and configuration of hearing loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147634913","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effects of Independent Dynamic Range Compression of Speech and Music Signals on Sound Quality.","authors":"Varsha Rallapalli, Yu-Hsuan Huang, Ryan Corey","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00171","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the effects of independent dynamic range compression (independent DRC) and conventional mixed-signal dynamic range compression (conventional DRC) on the sound quality of speech and music, in an ideal condition where the individual sound sources are available to the compressor. The hypothesis is that independent DRC optimized for individual signals yields higher sound quality ratings than conventional DRC optimized for a single signal.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants were 15 young adults with audiometrically normal hearing. Stimuli included a 10-s-long spontaneous speech sample spoken by a female talker mixed with a classical music excerpt. The speech level was fixed at 65 dBA, and the music level was varied to achieve three speech-to-background ratios (SBRs; -10, 0, and 10 dB). A hearing aid simulator applied frequency-specific gain for a standard mild-moderate hearing loss with three amplification strategies: (a) conventional DRC-speech and music were compressed with a 50-ms release time after the signals were mixed; (b) independent DRC-speech was compressed with a 50-ms release time, and music was independently compressed with a 4,000-ms release before the signals were mixed; and (c) linear amplification (control condition)-stimuli were processed with linear amplification, before or after mixing. The participants rated sound quality across four scales: overall sound quality, speech clarity, speech naturalness, and music naturalness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Independent DRC yielded higher ratings than conventional DRC and linear amplification for overall sound quality and speech clarity at -10 dB SBR. Both DRC strategies resulted in poorer speech clarity ratings than linear amplification at 10 dB SBR. There were no significant differences between the amplification strategies for speech naturalness and music naturalness scales across SBRs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results are a proof-of-concept that, under ideal circumstances, independent compression of sound sources can improve speech clarity and overall sound quality, particularly when the speech is softer than background music. Generally, DRC may result in poorer speech clarity compared to linear amplification when speech is more intense than background music. The results provide a baseline for future work involving independent compression of sound sources.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.31855201.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147634919","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}