An Audiovisual-FM System (AudiSee) Designed for Use in Classroom Settings: An Evaluation of the Effects of Visual Distractions on Speechreading Performance

ABSTRACT

In this article we describe the AudiSee system, an audiovisual-FM system designed primarily for use in classroom settings. First, the rationale underlying the development of AudiSee is discussed. Then, the components of the audiovisual-FM system are described. Finally, an experiment designed to evaluate the effects of visual background distractions on speechreading performance using AudiSee is presented. Three aspects of visual background distractions were investigated: (1) the orientation of AudiSee's mini-camera and a video monitor (portrait vs. landscape), (2) the nature of the visual backdrop (neutral/non-obtrusive vs. colorful/distracting), and (3) the magnitude of head movements made by the speaker while producing the test stimuli (none, moderate, and large amounts of head movement). Twenty sentences were recorded under each of the 12 experimental conditions (2 orientations × 2 visual backdrops × 3 head movement conditions). Fourteen subjects completed a closed-set sentence recognition task in a visual-alone modality (speechreading). The results failed to reveal any differences among the 12 experimental conditions investigated. These findings suggest that the visual background distractions recorded by AudiSee's mini-camera do not interfere with speechreading performance.

KEYWORD

Speechreading - audiovisual-FM system - audiovisual speech perception - visual speech perception - visual speech cues - visual distractions

REFERENCES

• 1 Berg F S. Facilitating Classroom Listening: a Handbook for Teachers of Normal and Hard of Hearing Students.  San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press 1987
• 2 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Position paper and guidelines for acoustics in educational environments.  ASHA Suppl . 1995;  37-19
• 3 Blair J. Effects of amplification, speechreading and classroom environment on reception of speech.  Volta Review . 1977;  79 443-449
• 4 Finitzo T. Classroom acoustics. In: Roeser R, Downs M, eds. Auditory Disorders in School Children New York: Thieme 1988
• 5 Hougtast T. The effect of ambient noise on speech intelligibility in classrooms.  Applied Acoustics . 1981;  14 15-25
• 6 Markides A. Speech levels and speech-to-noise ratios.  Br J Audiol . 1986;  20 115-120
• 7 Knecht H A, Whitelaw G M, Nelson P B. Structural variables and their relationship to the background noise levels and reverberation times in unoccupied classrooms.  Volt Rev . 2001;  101(5) 23-31
• 8 Crandell C C, Smaldino J J. Room acoustics for listeners with normal-hearing and hearing impairment. In: Valente M, Hosford-Dunn H, Roeser RJ, eds. Audiology Treatment. New York: Thieme 2000 : 601-627
• 9 Elliott L. Performance of children 7 to 17 years on a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence material with controlled word predictability.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1979;  66 651-653
• 10 Finitzo-Hieber T, Tillman T. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children.  J Speech Hear Res . 1978;  21 440-458
• 11 Crandell C. Noise effects on the speech recognition of children with minimal hearing loss.  Ear Hear . 1993;  7 210-217
• 12 Bradley J. Speech intelligibility in classrooms.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1986;  80(3) 846-854
• 13 Crandell C, Smaldino J. An update of classroom acoustics for children with hearing impairment.  Volta Review . 1994;  96 291-306
• 14 Kodaras M. Reverberation times of typical elementary school settings.  Noise Control . 1960;  6 17-19
• 15 McCrowsley F, Devens J. Acoustic characteristics of public school classrooms constructed between 1890 and 1960. NOISEXPO Proceedings 1975 : 101-103
• 16 Nabelek A, Pickett J. Reception of consonants in a classroom as affected by monaural and binaural listening, reverberation, and hearing aids.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1974;  56 628-639
• 17 Yacullo W S, Hawkins D B. Speech recognition in noise and reverberation by school age children.  Audiology . 1987;  26 235-246
• 18 Crandell C, Smaldino J, Flexer C. Sound-Field FM Amplification: Theory and Practical Applications.  San Diego, CA: Singular 1995
• 19 Ross M. Auditory Training Systems: Characteristics, Selection and Use.  Timonium, MD: Park Press 1992
• 20 Lewis D. Assistive devices for classroom listening.  Am J Audiol . 1994;  3 58-69
• 21 Sumby W H, Pollack I. Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1954;  26 212-215
• 22 Erber N P. Interaction of audition and vision in the recognition of oral speech stimuli.  J Speech Hear Res . 1969;  12 423-425
• 23 Erber N P. Auditory-visual perception of speech with reduced optical clarity.  J Speech Hear Res . 1979;  22 212-223
• 24 Binnie C A, Montgomery A A, Jackson P L. Auditory and visual contributions to the perception of consonants.  J Speech Hear Res . 1974;  17 619-630
• 25 Grant K W, Braida L D. Evaluating the articulation index for auditory-visual input.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1991;  89 2952-2960
• 26 Macleod A, Summerfield Q. Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech reception in noise.  Br J Audiol . 1987;  21 131-141
• 27 Macleod A. Summerfield Q.  A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. Br J Audiol . 1990;  24 24-43
• 28 Bourland-Hicks C. Listening effort and fatigue in school aged children with and without hearing loss. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 2000
• 29 Erber N P. Auditory, visual and auditory-visual recognition of consonants by children with normal and impaired hearing.  J Speech Hear Res . 1972;  15 413-422
• 30 Walden B E, Prosek R A, Worthington D W. Auditory and audiovisual feature transmission in hearing-impaired adults.  J Speech Hear Res . 1975;  18 272-280
• 31 Erber N P. Effects of distance on the visual reception of speech.  J Speech Hear Res . 1971;  14 848-857
• 32 Erber N P. The effects of angle, distance, and illumination on visual reception of speech by profoundly deaf children.  J Speech Hear Res . 1974;  17 99-112
• 33 Berger K W. Speechreading: Principles and Methods.  Baltimore, MD: National Educational Press 1972: 151-158
• 34 Green W B, Green K W. The process of speechreading. In: Northcott WH, ed. Oral Interpreting: Principles and Practices Baltimore, MD: University Park Press 1984: 123-139
• 35 Jackson J W. Effects of lighting condition and mode of presentation on the speechreading accuracy of deaf children. Doctoral dissertation in education, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 1967
• 36 Erber N P. Optimizing speech communication in the classroom. In: Simmons-Martin A, Calvert DR, eds. Parent-Infant Intervention: Communication Disorders New York: Grune and Stratton 1979
• 37 Stoker R G, French-St. George M. Factors influencing speechreading performance: Research findings; 1984. In: Northcott WH, ed. Oral Interpreting: Principles and Practices. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press 95-122
• 38 Gagné J P, Le Monday K, Desbiens C, Lapalme M, Ducas L. Evaluation of a Visual-FM system to enhance speechreading. In: Burnham D, Robert-Ribes J, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, eds. Proceedings 1998 International Conference on Auditory-Visual Speech Processing. Terrigal-Sydney, Australia; AVSP 1998: 167-170
• 39 Miller C A. Lipreading performance as a function of continuous visual distractions. M.A. Thesis, Michigan State University; 1965.  In Berger KW, ed. Speechreading: Principles and Methods. Baltimore, MD: National Educational Press 1972: 151-158
• 40 Keil J M. The effects of peripheral visual stimuli on lipreading performance. Ph.D. Dissertation. Michigan State University; 1968. In: Berger, KW, ed. Speechreading: Principles and Methods Baltimore, MD: National Educational Press 1972: 151-158
• 41 American National Standards Institute. ANSI S3.6-1969, Specifications for audiometers. ANSI, New York 1969