Literature DB >> 11008827

The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees.

B A Henry1, C M McKay, H J McDermott, G M Clark.   

Abstract

Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) procedures were used to measure the amount of speech information perceived in five frequency bands (170-570, 570-1170, 1170-1768, 1768-2680, and 2680-5744 Hz) by 15 users of the Cochlear Ltd. CI-22M implant and Spectra-22/SPEAK processor. The speech information perceived was compared to that perceived by normal-hearing listeners. The ability of these subjects to discriminate between stimulation on adjacent electrodes corresponding to each frequency band was also investigated, using a 4IFC procedure with random current level variations of between 0% and 60% of the dynamic range. Relative to normal-hearing listeners, speech information was, on average, significantly more reduced in the four frequency regions between 170 and 2680 Hz than in the region 2680-5744 Hz. There was a significant correlation between electrode discrimination ability (when the random level variation encompassed 20% or more of the dynamic range) and the amount of speech information perceived in the four frequency regions between 170 and 2680 Hz. There was no such correlation in the region 2680-5744 Hz, regardless of the extent of random level variation. These results indicate that speech information in the low to medium frequencies is more difficult for implantees to perceive, that this difficulty is correlated with the difficulty in discriminating electrode place in the presence of random loudness variations, and that fine spectral discrimination may be relatively more important in the vowel-formant regions than in higher frequency regions.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11008827     DOI: 10.1121/1.1287711

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  45 in total

1.  The relationship of audibility and the development of canonical babbling in young children with hearing impairment.

Authors:  Sandie M Bass-Ringdahl
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2010-05-10

Review 2.  Cochlear implants and brain stem implants.

Authors:  Richard T Ramsden
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.291

3.  Multichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Johan Laneau; Jan Wouters
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-05-27

Review 4.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

5.  Correlations Between Pitch and Phoneme Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Their Normal Hearing Peers.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-15

6.  Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-06-21

7.  Effects of high-rate pulse trains on electrode discrimination in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Christina L Runge-Samuelson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-06

8.  A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Jian Yu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 9.  Trends in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2004

10.  Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread-of-excitation using Cochlear's dual-electrode mode.

Authors:  Jenny L Goehring; Donna L Neff; Jacquelyn L Baudhuin; Michelle L Hughes
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.