Benefits of speech recognition in noise using remote microphones for people with typical hearing

• Published in: Journal of communication disorders 2024-11, Vol.112, p.106467, Article 106467
• Main Authors: Thibodeau, Linda M., Leach, Virginia, Sivaswami, Akhilandeshwari, Qi, Shuang
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Assistive technology; Female; Hearing Aids; Hearing Loss; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Noise; Normal hearing; Signal-To-Noise Ratio; Speech Perception; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0021-9924; 1873-7994; 1873-7994
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2024.106467

•Communicating in the presence of background noise can be challenging for not only persons with hearing loss but also for persons with typical hearing sensitivity.•Research with persons with hearing loss shows that the use of remote microphone technology can significantly reduce these challenges.•Comparison of two types of directional remote microphones, Phonak Roger Pen and Roger Select, in a simulated group setting in persons with typical hearing revealed that both microphones resulted in significantly increased performance compared to listening without the system.•The performance with the Roger Select was significantly greater than with the Roger Pen, particularly at the most challenging listening conditions.•Remote microphone systems may be recommended for persons with typical hearing to enhance communication in noisy situations. Remote microphone (RM) systems are designed to enhance speech recognition in noisy environments by improving the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for individuals with typical hearing (TH) and hearing impairment (HI). The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the advantages of speech recognition in noise for individuals with TH in a simulated group setting using two different remote microphones. A quasi-experimental, repeated-measures design was employed, involving ten participants with TH, ages 20 to 63 years. Each were fit with Roger Focus receivers bilaterally to listen to three RM conditions: Roger Select, Roger Pen, and no technology. Participants were instructed to transcribe sentences that were presented randomly at varying signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs: 0, -5, and -10 dB) from five speakers positioned equidistant around a circular table to simulate a group dining scenario. Significant main effects of the technology condition and noise level (p < .05) were found. Participants exhibited superior performance with Roger Select compared to Roger Pen. As expected, recognition rates decreased with lower SNRs across all three technology conditions. To enhance speech recognition in group settings for individuals with TH, the utilization of the Roger Select microphone in conjunction with bilateral Roger Focus receivers is recommended over the Roger Pen