Intelligibility ratings of continuous discourse: application to hearing aid selection.

Twelve normal-hearing subjects rated the intelligibility of 35-s, hearing-aid-processed continuous discourse (CD) passages. Three talkers (two male, one female), four hearing aids, and two signal-to-babble (S/B) ratios were used in a completely crossed design. Research questions concerned: (1) ability of listeners to rate intelligibility, (2) sensitivity of hearing aid rankings were based on intelligibility ratings for three CD passages per instrument, and (3) dependence of hearing aid rankings on (a) S/B ratio, and (b) talker characteristics. Results were: (1) listeners were able to rate intelligibility, (2) rankings based on intelligibility ratings of three CD passages per hearing aid were capable of identifying two superior instruments within a group of four hearing aids that were similar in frequency/gain function, (3) listening in a more difficult S/B ratio substantially decreased the sensitivity of the hearing aid rankings for the female talker but had only minor effects on the rankings for the male talkers, and (4) hearing aid intelligibility rankings were found to be different for different talkers. Applications to hearing aid selection are discussed.