This paper reports new measurements of the intelligibility of speech in conditions representative of elementary school classrooms. The speech test material was binaurally recorded in simulated classroom conditions and played back to subjects over headphones. Subjects included grade 1, 3, and 6 students (6, 8, and 11year olds) as well as adults. Recognizing that reverberation time is not a complete descriptor of room acoustics conditions, simulated conditions included realistic early-to-late arriving sound ratios as well as varied reverberation time. For conditions of constant signal-to-noise ratio, intelligibility scores increased with decreasing reverberation time. However, for conditions including realistic increases in speech level with varied reverberation time for constant noise level, intelligibility scores were near maximum for a range of reverberation times. Young children’s intelligibility scores benefited from added early reflections of speech sounds similar to adult listeners. The effect of varied reverberation time on the intelligibility of speech for young children was much less than the effect of varied signal-to-noise ratio. The results can be used to help to determine ideal conditions for speech communication in classrooms for younger listeners.

1.
J. S.
Bradley
and
H.
Sato
, “
The intelligibility of speech in elementary school classrooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
123
,
2078
2086
(
2008
).
2.
H.
Sato
and
J. S.
Bradley
, “
Evaluation of acoustical conditions for speech communication in working elementary school classrooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
123
,
2064
2077
(
2008
).
3.
A. K.
Nábělek
and
J. M.
Pickett
, “
Reception of consonants in a classroom as affected by monaural and binaural listening, noise, reverberation and hearing aids
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
56
,
628
639
(
1974
).
4.
T.
Finitzo-Hieber
and
T. W.
Tillman
, “
Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children
,”
J. Speech Hear. Res.
21
,
440
458
(
1978
).
5.
C. E.
Johnson
, “
Children’s phoneme identification in reverberation and noise
,”
J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res.
43
,
144
157
(
2000
).
6.
A.
Neuman
and
I.
Hochberg
, “
Children’s perception of speech in reverberation
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
73
,
2145
2149
(
1983
).
7.
J. S.
Bradley
, “
Speech intelligibility studies in classrooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
80
,
846
854
(
1986
).
8.
J. S.
Bradley
,
H.
Sato
, and
M.
Picard
, “
On the importance of early reflections for speech in rooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
113
,
3233
3244
(
2003
).
9.
M.
Hodgson
and
E.-M.
Nosal
, “
Effect of noise and occupancy on optimal reverberation times for speech intelligibility in classrooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
111
,
931
938
(
2002
).
10.
W.
Yang
and
M.
Hodgson
, “
Auralization study of optimum reverberation times for speech intelligibility for normal and hearing-impaired listeners in classrooms with diffuse sound fields
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
120
,
801
807
(
2008
).
11.
ISO3382, “
Acoustics—Measurement of the reverberation time of rooms with reference to other acoustical parameters
,” International Organisation for Standardisation, Geneva, Switzerland (
1998
).
12.
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) Standard S12.60, “
Acoustical performance criteria, design requirements, and guidelines for schools
” (American National Standards Institute, New York).
13.
L. L.
Beranek
,
Concert and Opera Halls: How They Sound
(
Acoustical Society of America
,
New York
,
1996
).
14.
M.
Barron
and
L. J.
Lee
, “
Energy relations in concert auditoriums I
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
84
,
618
628
(
1988
).
15.
S.
Chiles
and
M.
Barron
, “
Sound level distribution and scatter in proportionate spaces
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
226
,
1585
1595
(
2004
).
16.
N. B.
Marshall
, “
The effects of different signal-to-noise ratios on the speech recognition scores of children
,” Ph.D. thesis,
University of Alabama
, Tuscaloosa, AL (
1987
).
17.
M.
Ross
and
J.
Lerman
, “
A picture identification test for hearing impaired children
,”
J. Speech Hear. Res.
13
,
44
53
(
1970
).
18.
A.
Kulkarni
and
H. S.
Colburn
, “
Variability in the characterization of the headphone transfer-function
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
102
,
1071
1074
(
2000
).
19.
ANSI S3.5-1997, “
Methods for calculation of the speech intelligibility Index
,” American National Standard, Standards Secretariat,
Acoustical Society of America
, New York.
20.
W.
Yang
and
M.
Hodgson
, “
Validation of the auralization technique: Comparative speech-intelligibility tests in real and virtual classrooms
,”
Acta. Acust. Acust.
93
,
991
999
(
2007
).
21.
D. F.
Hoth
, “
Room noise spectra at subscribers’ telephone locations
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
12
,
449
504
(
1941
).
22.
W. E.
Blazier
, “
Revised noise criteria for application in the acoustical design and rating of HVAC systems
,”
Noise Control Eng.
16
,
64
73
(
1981
).
23.
J. S.
Bradley
,
H.
Sato
,
B. N.
Gover
, and
N.
York
, “
Comparison of speech intelligibility scores for direct listening and headphone playback
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
117
,
2465
(
2005
).
24.
J. S.
Bradley
, “
Predictors of speech intelligibility in Rooms
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
80
,
837
845
(
1986
).
25.
J. S.
Bradley
,
R. D.
Reich
, and
S. G.
Norcross
, “
On the combined effects of signal-to-noise ratio and room acoustics on speech intelligibility
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
106
,
1820
1828
(
1999
).
26.
R.
Reich
and
J. S.
Bradley
, “
Optimizing classroom acoustics using computer model studies
,”
Can. Acoust.
26
,
15
21
(
1998
).
You do not currently have access to this content.