Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 856

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing

Festen, Joost M., Plomp, Reinier·1990·The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Abstract

The speech-reception threshold (SRT) for sentences presented in a fluctuating interfering background sound of 80 dBA SPL is measured for 20 normal-hearing listeners and 20 listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment. The interfering sounds range from steady-state noise, via modulated noise, to a single competing voice. Two voices are used, one male and one female, and the spectrum of the masker is shaped according to these voices. For both voices, the SRT is measured as well in noise spectrally shaped according to the target voice as shaped according to the other voice. The results show that, for normal-hearing listeners, the SRT for sentences in modulated noise is 4–6 dB lower than for steady-state noise; for sentences masked by a competing voice, this difference is 6–8 dB. For listeners with moderate sensorineural hearing loss, elevated thresholds are obtained without an appreciable effect of masker fluctuations. The implications of these results for estimating a hearing handicap in everyday conditions are discussed. By using the articulation index (AI), it is shown that hearing-impaired individuals perform poorer than suggested by the loss of audibility for some parts of the speech signal. Finally, three mechanisms are discussed that contribute to the absence of unmasking by masker fluctuations in hearing-impaired listeners. The low sensation level at which the impaired listeners receive the masker seems a major determinant. The second and third factors are: reduced temporal resolution and a reduction in comodulation masking release, respectively.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1121/1.400247

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 856

Metadata

Authors
Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R.
Venue
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Published
1990-10-01
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
1725-1736
ISSN
  • 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-8524
OpenAlex
W2091766358
Cited by
856
References
0
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1121/1.400247
The paper
Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.400247

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.