Agree to disagree then. Simply because single words in a noisy place is not realistic. Weâre not testing what we actually hear in a vacuum. Thatâs what the original Word Recognition Test in a quiet soundproof booth is for, and of course it has its usefulness and thatâs why itâs done.
But what weâre talking about here is in the context of the signal to noise separation performance in a real world test with surrounding noise. We donât need to do another Word Recognition Test in noise. Itâs useless to me because in this context, itâs not about what you actually âhearâ (like you said), itâs about what you âunderstandâ. I actually donât really care what I âhearâ, as long as I âunderstandâ what is being said to me in a noisy place. If it involves my brain filling in the missing words, thatâs fine with me.
Itâs because your brain uses MANY things to isolate and understand speech, not just one thing. Itâs not just what it hears, but how it hears it, like the tonal distinction between the speakerâs voice (like low for male or high for female), the loudness (or softness) of the speakerâs voice compared to others, and maybe the frequency of the speakerâs speech (how fast or slow they speak), and even what the babbles sound like differently from the speakerâs speech. All of that helps the brain isolate and formulate and arrive at an understanding.
In fact, if you simply do single word test in noise like you propose, chances are the result you achieve may fare worse than the result of a real-life complete sentences testing. Thatâs because the adjustment to improve what you âhearâ can be overly corrected more than necessary for you to âunderstandâ, possibly toward a more detrimental result instead of a more helpful result.