17 subjects provided magnitude estimations in the form of quality judgments of a filtered speech stimulus which was a nonsense sentence containing all of the consonants of English from Fairbanks. It was presented to subjects at 8 high-pass and 8 low-pass filtering conditions. Consistent magnitude estimations to the filtered stimulus were similar for both conditions. Also, for both conditions, subjects' numerical responses consistently increased in value as stimulus quality was judged to be poorer.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarryS. K.KiddG. (1981) Psychophysical scaling of distorted speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 46, 44–47.
2.
BoothroydK. A. (1978) Speech perception and sensorineural hearing loss. In RossMGiolasT. (Eds.), Auditory management of hearing impaired children. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Pp. 117–144.
3.
EllisL.FucciD. (1991) Magnitude-estimation scaling of speech intelligibility: effects of listeners' experience and semantic-syntactic context. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 73, 295–305.
FucciD.PetrosinoL.SchusterS.RandolphE. (1991) Lingual vibrotactile threshold shift during magnitude-estimation scaling: effects on magnitude-estimation responses and scaling behavior across age. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72, 183–192.
6.
LawsonG. D.ChialM. R. (1982) Magnitude estimation of degraded speech quality by normal- and impaired-hearing listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 72, 1781–1787.
7.
MartinF. N. (1986) Introduction to audiology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8.
PavlovicC. V.RossiMEspesserR. (1990) Use of the magnitude estimation technique for assessing the performance of text-to-speech synthesis system. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 373–382.
9.
SchiavettiN.MetzD. E.SitlerR. W. (1981) Construct validity of direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of speech intelligibility: evidence from a study of the hearing impaired. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 24, 441–445.
10.
SmithC. R. (1975) Residual hearing and speech production in deaf children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 18, 795–811.
11.
StevensS. S. (1955) The measurement of loudness. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 815–820.
12.
StevensS. S. (1961) The psychophysics of sensory function. In RosenblithW. A. (Ed.), Sensory communication. New York: Wiley. Pp. 1–33.
13.
StudebakerG. A.SherbecoeR. L. (1988) Magnitude estimations of the intelligibility and quality of speech in noise. Ear and Hearing, 9, 259–267.
14.
ZwislockiJ.GoodmanD. A. (1980) Absolute scaling of sensory magnitude: a validation. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 28–38.
