| Popis: |
Background and Aim: Hearing and speech perception are essential in social life. As our environment contains many background noises in everyday conversations, it is necessary to evaluate the noise tolerance. The Acceptable Noise Level (ANL) provides an approach to quantifying the maximum amount of background noise a listener is willing to put up with while listening to a target story without becoming tense. Exploring noise tolerance in speech perception, the study investigates how different calibration methods impact normal hearing participants’ monotic and dichotic ANL results. Methods: This investigation utilizes a pared-sample t-test for statistical analysis, adopting a comparative observational approach. This study applied the Persian version of the typical ANL test. Two approaches have equalized the target and background stimuli: Root Mean Squared (RMS) and loudness match calibration via Adobe Audition. Using these modified materials the Most Comfortable Level (MCL), the Background Noise Level (BNL), and ANL were compared in terms of RMS and loudness match calibration. Fifty normal persons aged (18–39), under the conditions of monotic and dichotic listening, participated in this study. Results: The statistical analysis using a paired-sample t-test revealed no significant differences in the outcomes of the ANL test between the calibrations of RMS and loudness matching under both monotic and dichotic listening conditions (p=0.31 and p=0.67, respectively). Conclusion: The study suggests that calibration procedures, namely RMS and Loudness matching, do not affect ANL in either monotic or dichotic conditions. |
