嘈杂语噪声下普通话儿童语句测听表的标准化

Standardized Mandarin Sentence Perception in Babble Noise Test Materials for Children

郗昕;陈艾婷;李佳楠;冀飞;洪梦迪;杨仕明;韩东一;

1:解放军总医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科

摘要
目的研究嘈杂语噪声下普通话语句识别测听材料在学龄前儿童言语测听中的效度、信度和敏感度指标,并分析年龄、性别因素对测听结果的影响。方法招募54名北京市46岁听力言语正常儿童(分成4.06岁听力言语正常儿童(分成4.0、4.5、4.5、5.0、5.06.0岁三组,每组18名,男女各半),应用27张中文嘈杂语噪声下普通话语句识别表,采用随机区组裂区设计,在幼儿园简易声场(本底噪声<40 dB A)在SNR=+1、-2、-5 dB三种条件下由同一扬声器播放语句(强度固定为65 dB SPL)和噪声,由儿童复述所听到的语句,逐一计算各表的言语识别率。结果①多种信噪比下的识别率得分在各表之间的差异无统计学意义;②各表对学龄前儿童的识别率(performance)-信噪比(SNR)函数显示,SNR50阈值为-1.96±0.19 dB SNR,斜率为15.8%±1.1%/dB;③各表得分经"合理化的"反正弦变换,推定在95%置信度下的临界差值(critical difference,CD)为24.6%;④46.0岁三组,每组18名,男女各半),应用27张中文嘈杂语噪声下普通话语句识别表,采用随机区组裂区设计,在幼儿园简易声场(本底噪声<40 dB A)在SNR=+1、-2、-5 dB三种条件下由同一扬声器播放语句(强度固定为65 dB SPL)和噪声,由儿童复述所听到的语句,逐一计算各表的言语识别率。结果①多种信噪比下的识别率得分在各表之间的差异无统计学意义;②各表对学龄前儿童的识别率(performance)-信噪比(SNR)函数显示,SNR50阈值为-1.96±0.19 dB SNR,斜率为15.8%±1.1%/dB;③各表得分经"合理化的"反正弦变换,推定在95%置信度下的临界差值(critical difference,CD)为24.6%;④44.5岁儿童与另两组儿童之间的得分差异有统计学意义(P=0.000 000),另二组儿童之间的得分差异无统计学意义(P=0.895 199)。男女之间的差异也有统计学意义(P=0.000 000)。结论①27张中文嘈杂语噪声下的普通话语句识别表,对学龄前儿童彼此等价;②学龄前儿童50%语句识别率所对应的SNR50接近-2 dB,测试的敏感度为15.8%/dB,均低于成人水平;③男女儿童在噪声下的语句识别能力虽略有差异,但远小于信度指标所对应的24.6%的临界差值;④每表测试时间仅1.5分钟,适用于4.5岁以上的城市儿童。
关键词
儿童;言语测听;噪声;效度;信度;性别
基金项目(Foundation):
“十一五”国家科技支撑计划(2007BAI18B12,2008BAI50B01,2008BAI50B08);; 北京市哲学社会科学“十一五”规划项目(06BaWY014)
作者
郗昕;陈艾婷;李佳楠;冀飞;洪梦迪;杨仕明;韩东一;
参考文献

1 Tyler RS.Speech perception by children[M].In:Tyler RS,ed.Cochlear implants:audiological foundations.San Diego:Singular Publishing Group,1993.191~256.

2 Byrne D,Dillon H,Tran K,et al.An international compari-son of long-term average speech spectra[J].J Acoust SocAm,1996:2 108.

3 Wilson RH,Bell TS,Koslowski JA.Learning effects associ-ated with repeated word-recognition measures using sentencematerials[J].J Rehab Res,Devel,2003,40:329.

4赵阳,郗昕,冀飞,等.嘈杂语噪声下汉语语句测听中的学习效应[J].听力学及言语疾病杂志,2009,17:107.

5 Nissen SL,Harris RW,Jennings LJ.Psychometrically equiva-lent Mandarin bisyllabic words for speech reception thresholdtesting in Mandarin[J].Int J Audiol,2005,44:379.

6 Studebaker GA.A"rationalized"arcsine transform[J].JSpeech Hear Res,1985,28:455.

7 Sherbecoe RL,Studebaker GA.Supplementary formulas andtables for calculating and interconverting speech recognitionscores in transformed arsine units[J].Int J Audiol,2008,43:442.

8 Boothroyd A.Speech perception tests and hearing-impairedchildren[M].In:Plant G,Spens KE,ed.Profound deafness andspeech communication.London:Whurr Publishers,1995.345~371.

9 Luce PA,Pisoni DB.Recognizing spoken words:The neigh-borhood activation model[J].Ear and Hearing,1998,19:1.

10 Kirk KI.Assessing speech perception in listeners with co-chlear implants:the development of the lexical neighborhoodtests[J].The Volta Review,1998,100:63.

11 Wilson RH,McArdle R.Change is in the air in more waysthan one[J].Hear J,2008,61:10.

12 Green R.The uses and misuses of speech audiometry in reha-bilitation[M].In:Martin M,ed.Speech audiometry.Lon-don:Whurr Publishers,1997.150~175.

13 Killion MC,Niquatte PA,Gudmundsen GI.Development of aquick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noiseratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners[J].J Acoust Soc Am,2004,116:2 395.

14 Dillon H.A quantitative examination of the sources of speechdiscrimination test score variability[J].Ear Hear,1982,3:51.

15 Dillon H,Ching T.What makes a good speech test[M].In:Plant G,Spens KE,ed.Profound deafness and speech com-munication.London:Whurr Publishers,1995.305~344.

16 Nilsson M,Soli SD,Sullivan J.Development of the hearingin noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresh-olds in quiet and in noise[J].J Acoust Soc Am,1994,95:1 085.

17 Wong LN,Soli SD,Liu S,et al.Development of the manda-rin hearing in noise test(MHINT)[J].Ear Hear,2007,4(Suppl):70.