Cargando…

Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods

Speech frequency following responses (sFFRs) are increasingly used in translational auditory research. Statistically-based automated sFFR detection could aid response identification and provide a basis for stopping rules when recording responses in clinical and/or research applications. In this brie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheng, Fan-Yin, Smith, Spencer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8869319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35200259
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/audiolres12010010
_version_ 1784656469586608128
author Cheng, Fan-Yin
Smith, Spencer
author_facet Cheng, Fan-Yin
Smith, Spencer
author_sort Cheng, Fan-Yin
collection PubMed
description Speech frequency following responses (sFFRs) are increasingly used in translational auditory research. Statistically-based automated sFFR detection could aid response identification and provide a basis for stopping rules when recording responses in clinical and/or research applications. In this brief report, sFFRs were measured from 18 normal hearing adult listeners in quiet and speech-shaped noise. Two statistically-based automated response detection methods, the F-test and Hotelling’s T(2) (HT(2)) test, were compared based on detection accuracy and test time. Similar detection accuracy across statistical tests and conditions was observed, although the HT(2) test time was less variable. These findings suggest that automated sFFR detection is robust for responses recorded in quiet and speech-shaped noise using either the F-test or HT(2) test. Future studies evaluating test performance with different stimuli and maskers are warranted to determine if the interchangeability of test performance extends to these conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8869319
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88693192022-02-25 Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods Cheng, Fan-Yin Smith, Spencer Audiol Res Brief Report Speech frequency following responses (sFFRs) are increasingly used in translational auditory research. Statistically-based automated sFFR detection could aid response identification and provide a basis for stopping rules when recording responses in clinical and/or research applications. In this brief report, sFFRs were measured from 18 normal hearing adult listeners in quiet and speech-shaped noise. Two statistically-based automated response detection methods, the F-test and Hotelling’s T(2) (HT(2)) test, were compared based on detection accuracy and test time. Similar detection accuracy across statistical tests and conditions was observed, although the HT(2) test time was less variable. These findings suggest that automated sFFR detection is robust for responses recorded in quiet and speech-shaped noise using either the F-test or HT(2) test. Future studies evaluating test performance with different stimuli and maskers are warranted to determine if the interchangeability of test performance extends to these conditions. MDPI 2022-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8869319/ /pubmed/35200259 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/audiolres12010010 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Brief Report
Cheng, Fan-Yin
Smith, Spencer
Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title_full Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title_fullStr Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title_full_unstemmed Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title_short Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods
title_sort objective detection of the speech frequency following response (sffr): a comparison of two methods
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8869319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35200259
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/audiolres12010010
work_keys_str_mv AT chengfanyin objectivedetectionofthespeechfrequencyfollowingresponsesffracomparisonoftwomethods
AT smithspencer objectivedetectionofthespeechfrequencyfollowingresponsesffracomparisonoftwomethods