Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31(10): 719-724
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1719134
Research Article

Korean Clear Speech Improves Speech Intelligibility for Individuals with Normal Hearing and Individuals with Hearing Loss

Su Yeon Shin
1   Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Graduate School, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Gangwon-do, South Korea
2   ONE Hearing & Speech Care Center, Seo-gu, Daejeon, South Korea
,
Hongyeop Oh
1   Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Graduate School, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Gangwon-do, South Korea
,
In-Ki Jin
3   Division of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Research Institute of Audiology and Speech Pathology, College of Natural Sciences, Hallym University, Chuncheon, South Korea
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Clear speech is an effective communication strategy to improve speech intelligibility. While clear speech in several languages has been shown to significantly benefit intelligibility among listeners with differential hearing sensitivities and across environments of different noise levels, whether these results apply to Korean clear speech is unclear on account of the language's unique acoustic and linguistic characteristics.

Purpose This study aimed to measure the intelligibility benefits of Korean clear speech relative to those of conversational speech among listeners with normal hearing and hearing loss.

Research Design We used a mixed-model design that included both within-subject (effects of speaking style and listening condition) and between-subject (hearing status) elements.

Data Collection and Analysis We compared the rationalized arcsine unit scores, which were transformed from the number of keywords recognized and repeated, between clear and conversational speech in groups with different hearing sensitivities across five listening conditions (quiet and 10, 5, 0, and –5 dB signal-to-noise ratio) using a mixed model analysis.

Results The intelligibility scores of Korean clear speech were significantly higher than those of conversational speech under most listening conditions in all groups; the former yielded increases of 6 to 32 rationalized arcsine units in intelligibility.

Conclusion The present study provides information on the actual benefits of Korean clear speech for listeners with varying hearing sensitivities. Audiologists or hearing professionals may use this information to establish communication strategies for Korean patients with hearing loss.

Keywords

speech perception - clear speech - communication strategy

Disclosure

Pilot data of this paper were presented at the American Auditory Society Annual Meeting (2019) as a poster presentation. This paper has not been submitted at any journals.


Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the institutional review board of Hallym University (HIRB-2018–003) and each participant received a written explanation of the study aims, protocol, and procedures and provided written informed consent before participating.




Publication History

Received: 04 July 2019

Accepted: 02 March 2020

Article published online:
15 February 2021

© 2021. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Bradlow AR, Kraus N, Hayes E. Speaking clearly for children with learning disabilities: sentence perception in noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2003; 46 (01) 80-97
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ferguson SH. Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: vowel intelligibility for older adults with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55 (03) 779-790
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Maniwa K, Jongman A, Wade T. Perception of clear fricatives by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2008; 123 (02) 1114-1125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Smiljanić R, Bradlow AR. Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English. J Acoust Soc Am 2005; 118 (3 Pt 1): 1677-1688
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Smiljanic R, Gilbert RC. Intelligibility of noise-adapted and clear speech in child, young adult, and older adult talkers. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2017; a 60 (11) 3069-3080
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Durisala N, Prakash SGR, Nambi A, Batra R. Intelligibility and acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech in Telugu (a South Indian Dravidian language). Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011; 63 (02) 165-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Picheny MA, Durlach NI, Braida LD. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing. II: acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. J Speech Hear Res 1986; 29 (04) 434-446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Smiljanic R, Gilbert RC. Acoustics of clear and noise-adapted speech in children, young, and older adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2017; b 60 (11) 3081-3096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Uchanski RM, Choi SS, Braida LD, Reed CM, Durlach NI. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing IV: further studies of the role of speaking rate. J Speech Hear Res 1996; 39 (03) 494-509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ferguson SH, Kewley-Port D. Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: acoustic characteristics of vowels. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007; 50 (05) 1241-1255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Liu S, Zeng FG. Temporal properties in clear speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 2006; 120 (01) 424-432
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Whitfield JA, Goberman AM. Articulatory-acoustic vowel space: associations between acoustic and perceptual measures of clear speech. Int J Speech Lang Pathol 2017; 19 (02) 184-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cho T, Lee Y, Kim S. Communicatively driven versus prosodically driven hyper-articulation in Korean. J Phonetics 2011; 39: 344-361
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Yoo J, Oh H, Jeong S, Jin IK. Comparison of speech rate and long-term average speech spectrum between Korean clear speech and conversational speech. J Audiol Otol 2019; 23 (04) 187-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Smiljanić R, Bradlow AR. Speaking and hearing clearly: talker and listener factors in speaking style changes. Lang Linguist Compass 2009; 3 (01) 236-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Amlani AM, Punch JL, Ching TY. Methods and applications of the audibility index in hearing aid selection and fitting. Trends Amplif 2002; 6 (03) 81-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zeng FG, Turner CW. Recognition of voiceless fricatives by normal and hearing-impaired subjects. J Speech Hear Res 1990; 33 (03) 440-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ferguson SH. Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: vowel intelligibility for normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 116 (4 Pt 1): 2365-2373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Payton KL, Uchanski RM, Braida LD. Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95 (03) 1581-1592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kim JS, Lim D, Hong HN. et al. Development of Korean standard monosyllabic word lists for adults (KS-MWL-A). Audiol Speech Res 2008; 4: 126-140
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 American National Standards Institute. Specifications for Audiometers, ANSI S3.6–2010. New York: ANSI; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Park JH, Kwon YC. Modification of the Mini-Mental State Examination for use in the elderly in a non-western society. Part 1. Development of Korean version of Mini-Mental State Examination. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 1990; 5: 381-387
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Moon SK, Hee Kim S, Ah Mun H. et al. The Korean Hearing in Noise Test. Int J Audiol 2008; 47 (06) 375-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lam J, Tjaden K. Intelligibility of clear speech: effect of instruction. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2013; 56 (05) 1429-1440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Studebaker GA. A “rationalized” arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res 1985; 28 (03) 455-462
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar