Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Lipreading sentences with vibrotactile vocoders: Performance of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects

1991; Acoustical Society of America; Volume: 90; Issue: 6 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1121/1.401771

1520-9024

Lynne E. Bernstein, Marilyn E. Demorest, David C. Coulter, Michael P. O’Connell,

Noise Effects and Management

Three vibrotactile vocoders were compared in a training study involving several different speech perception tasks. Vocoders were: (1) the Central Institute for the Deaf version of the Queen’s University vocoder, with 1/3-oct filter spacing and logarithmic output scaling (CIDLog) [Engebretson and O’Connell, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. BME-33, 712–716 (1986)]; (2) the same vocoder with linear output scaling (CIDLin); and (3) the Gallaudet University vocoder designed with greater resolution in the second formant region, relative to the CID vocoders, and linear output scaling (GULin). Four normal-hearing subjects were assigned to either of two control groups, visual-only control and vocoder control, for which they received the CIDLog vocoder. Five normal-hearing and four hearing-impaired subjects were assigned to the linear vocoders. Results showed that the three vocoders provided equivalent information in word-initial and word-final tactile-only consonant identification. However, GULin was the only vocoder significantly effective in enhancing lipreading of isolated prerecorded sentences. Individual subject analyses showed significantly enhanced lipreading by the three normal-hearing and two hearing-impaired subjects who received the GULin vocoder. Over the entire training period of the experiment, the mean difference between aided and unaided lipreading of sentences by the GULin aided hearing-impaired subjects was approximately 6% words correct. Possible explanations for failure to confirm previous success with the CIDLog vocoder [Weisenberger et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 86, 1764–1775 (1989)] are discussed.