Effects of Active and Passive Hearing Protection Devices on Sound Source Localization, Speech Recognition, and Tone Detection

Hearing protection devices (HPDs) such as earplugs offer to mitigate noise exposure and reduce the incidence of hearing loss among persons frequently exposed to intense sound. However, distortions of spatial acoustic information and reduced audibility of low-intensity sounds caused by many existing...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPloS one Vol. 10; no. 8; p. e0136568
Main Authors Brown, Andrew D., Beemer, Brianne T., Greene, Nathaniel T., Argo, Theodore, Meegan, G. Douglas, Tollin, Daniel J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Public Library of Science 27.08.2015
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subjects
Acoustic noise
Acoustics
Adult
Analysis
Auditory perception
Biophysics
Ear protection
Ear Protective Devices
Ears & hearing
Ecological risk assessment
Environmental audits
Environmental law
Hearing loss
Hearing protection
Hearing protectors
Humans
Localization
Male
Males
Noise
Noise levels
Noise reduction
Physiological aspects
Physiology
Pitch Perception
Protective equipment
Situational awareness
Sound
Sound Localization
Speech
Speech Perception
Speech recognition
Thresholds
Transfer functions
United States
United States > US
Colorado
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Hearing protection devices (HPDs) such as earplugs offer to mitigate noise exposure and reduce the incidence of hearing loss among persons frequently exposed to intense sound. However, distortions of spatial acoustic information and reduced audibility of low-intensity sounds caused by many existing HPDs can make their use untenable in high-risk (e.g., military or law enforcement) environments where auditory situational awareness is imperative. Here we assessed (1) sound source localization accuracy using a head-turning paradigm, (2) speech-in-noise recognition using a modified version of the QuickSIN test, and (3) tone detection thresholds using a two-alternative forced-choice task. Subjects were 10 young normal-hearing males. Four different HPDs were tested (two active, two passive), including two new and previously untested devices. Relative to unoccluded (control) performance, all tested HPDs significantly degraded performance across tasks, although one active HPD slightly improved high-frequency tone detection thresholds and did not degrade speech recognition. Behavioral data were examined with respect to head-related transfer functions measured using a binaural manikin with and without tested HPDs in place. Data reinforce previous reports that HPDs significantly compromise a variety of auditory perceptual facilities, particularly sound localization due to distortions of high-frequency spectral cues that are important for the avoidance of front-back confusions.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
Conceived and designed the experiments: ADB DJT NTG TA GDM. Performed the experiments: BTB ADB NTG. Analyzed the data: ADB NTG DJT. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: ADB NTG DJT. Wrote the paper: ADB BTB NTG TA GDM DJT.
Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal's policy and have the following competing interests: Authors TA and GDM are employed by Applied Research Associates, Inc., and were involved in the development of two of the hearing protection devices (ShotShields, Hybrid) tested in the present study. Both authors were involved in the design of experiments and writing of the manuscript; neither contributed to data collection or analysis. This does not alter the authors' adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0136568