ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2017
Effects of reverberation, background talker number, and compression release time on signal-to-noise ratio.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hearing Aids: What Works Well and What Can Be Improved.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026Review
- Access to "speech glimpses" in multitalker mixtures afforded by non-linear hearing-aid gain with fast-acting compression.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- The Noise Reduction Algorithm May Not Compensate for the Degradation in Output Signal-to-Noise Ratio Caused by Wide Dynamic Range Compression.American journal of audiology · 2024Article
- Verification of Estimated Output Signal-to-Noise Ratios From a Phase Inversion Technique Using a Simulated Hearing Aid.American journal of audiology · 2023Article
- Influence of Audibility and Distortion on Recognition of Reverberant Speech for Children and Adults with Hearing Aid Amplification.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2022Article
- A Data-driven Distance Metric for Evaluating the effects of Dynamic Range Compression in Adverse Conditions.Trends in hearingReview
- Effects of Slow- and Fast-Acting Compression on Hearing-Impaired Listeners' Consonant-Vowel Identification in Interrupted Noise.Trends in hearingArticle
- Effects of Reverberation on the Relation Between Compression Speed and Working Memory for Speech-in-Noise Perception.Ear and hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) processing in hearing aids alters the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of a speech-in-noise signal. This effect depends on the modulations of the speech and noise, input SNR, and WDRC speed. The purpose of the present experiment was to examine the change in output SNR caused by the interaction between modulation characteristics and WDRC speed. Two modulation manipulations were examined: (1) reverberation and (2) variation in background talker number. Results indicated that fast-acting WDRC altered SNR more than slow-acting WDRC; however, reverberation reduced this difference. Additionally, less modulated maskers led to poorer output SNRs than modulated maskers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.