The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception
Abstract
The effect of reducing low-frequency modulations in the temporal envelope on the speech-reception threshold (SRT) for sentences in noise and on phoneme identification was investigated. For this purpose, speech was split up into a series of frequency bands (1/4, 1/2, or 1 oct wide) and the amplitude envelope for each band was high-pass filtered at cutoff frequencies of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 Hz, or ∞ (completely flattened). Results for 42 normal-hearing listeners show: (1) A clear reduction in sentence intelligibility with narrow-band processing for cutoff frequencies above 64 Hz; and (2) no reduction of sentence intelligibility when only amplitude variations below 4 Hz are reduced. Based on the modulation transfer function of some conditions, it is concluded that fast multichannel dynamic compression leads to an insignificant change in masked SRT. Combining these results with previous data on low-pass envelope filtering (temporal smearing) [Drullman et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1053–1064 (1994)] shows that at 8–10 Hz the temporal modulation spectrum is divided into two equally important parts. Vowel and consonant identification with nonsense syllables were studied for cutoff frequencies of 2, 8, 32, 128 Hz, and ∞, processed in 1/4-oct bands. Results for 12 subjects indicate that, just as for low-pass envelope filtering, consonants are more affected than vowels. Errors in vowel identification mainly consist of reduced recognition of diphthongs and of durational confusions. For the consonants there are no clear confusion patterns, but stops appear to suffer least. In most cases, the responses tend to fall into the correct category (stop, fricative, or vowel-like).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
The cortical organization of speech processing
Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2113 · Cited by 5,495
The Natural Statistics of Audiovisual Speech
Chandrasekaran, C., Trubanova, A., Stillittano, S., Caplier, A., & Ghazanfar, A. A. (2009) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000436 · Cited by 630
Neural Oscillations Carry Speech Rhythm through to Comprehension
Peelle, J. E., & Davis, M. H. (2012) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00320 · Cited by 571
Doelling, K. B., Arnal, L. H., Ghitza, O., & Poeppel, D. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.06.035 · Cited by 571
Füllgrabe, C., Moore, B. C. J., & Stone, M. A. (2015) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2014.00347 · Cited by 527
Metadata
- Authors
- Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R.
- Venue
- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
- Publisher
- Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
- Published
- 1994-05-01
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2670-2680
- ISSN
- 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8524
- OpenAlex
- W2075012882
- Cited by
- 589
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.63
- 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: Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1121/1.409836
- The paper
- Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1994). Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.409836
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.