Conventional hearing protection devices have often been implicated in compromised auditory perception, degraded signal detection, and reduced speech communication abilities. Recent technological developments have been used to augment hearing protectors in an attempt to alleviate these problems for the user, while at the same time providing adequate attenuation. Operational characteristics, design features, performance data, and applications for active noise reduction, sound transmission, frequency-selective, adjustable attenuation, amplitude-sensitive, and uniform attenuation devices are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenC. H.BergerE. H. (1990). Development of a unique passive hearing protector with level-dependent and flat attenuation characteristics. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 34 (3), 97–105
2.
BartholomaeR. C.SteinR. R. (1990). Active noise cancellation — performance in a hearing protector under ideal and degraded conditions. In Proceedings of NOISE-CON90 (pp. 151–155). Austin, TX: The University of Texas
3.
BergerE.H. (1991). Flat-reponse, moderate attenuation, and level-dependent HPDs: How they work and what they can do for you. Spectrum (Newsletter of the National Hearing Conservation Association), 8, Suppl. 1, 17
4.
CasaliJ. G.HorylevM. J. (1987). Speech discrimination in noise: The influence of hearing protection. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society—31st Annual Meeting (pp. 1246–1250). New York, NY: Human Factors Society
5.
GowerD. W.CasaliJ. G. (1992) An experimental comparison of Active Noise Reduction and passive attenuation headsets with regard to speech intelligibility and hearing protection. Manuscript submitted for publication
6.
HormannH.Lazarus-MainkaG.SchubeiusM.LazarusH. (1984). The effect of noise and the wearing of ear protectors on verbal communication. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 23 (2), 69–77
7.
KillionM.DeVilbissE.StewartJ. (1988). An earplug with uniform 15-dB attenuation. The Hearing Journal, 41 (5), 14–17
8.
KryterK. D. (1946). Effects of ear protective devices on the intelligibility of speech in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 18 (2), 413–417
9.
LuegP.Process of silencing sound oscillations. U.S. Patent No. 2,043,416
10.
MaxwellD. W.WilliamsC. E.RobertsonR. M.ThomasG. B. (1987). Performance characteristics of active hearing protection devices. Sound and Vibration, 21 (5), 14–18
11.
MeekerW. F. (1957). Active ear defender systems, development of a laboratory model, part II (WADC TR 57–368). Dayton, OH: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
12.
MoskoJ. D.FletcherJ. L. (1971). Evaluation of the Gunfender earplug: Temporary threshold shift and speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49, 1732–1733
13.
NixonC. W.McKinleyR. L.SteuverJ. W. (1992). Performance of active noise reduction headsets. In DancerA. L.HendersonD.SalviR. J.HamernikR. P. (Eds.), Noise-induced hearing loss (pp.389–400). St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc
SuterA. H. (1989). The effects of hearing protectors on speech communication and the perception of warning signals (AMCMS Code 611102.74A0011). Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory
16.
WilkinsP.MartinA. M. (1987). Hearing protection and warning sounds in industry—A review. Applied Acoustics, 21, 267–293
17.
ZwislockiJ. (1957). Ear protectors. In HarrisC. M. (Ed.), Handbook of noise control (pp. 8–1 to 8–27). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
