Literature DB >> 16158655

Noise improves modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners at moderate carrier levels.

Monita Chatterjee1, Sandra I Oba.   

Abstract

Envelope detection and processing are very important for cochlear implant (CI) listeners, who must rely on obtaining significant amounts of acoustic information from the time-varying envelopes of stimuli. In previous work, Chatterjee and Robert [JARO 2(2), 159-171 (2001)] reported on a stochastic-resonance-type effect in modulation detection by CI listeners: optimum levels of noise in the envelope enhanced modulation detection under certain conditions, particularly when the carrier level was low. The results of that study suggested that a low carrier level was sufficient to evoke the observed stochastic resonance effect, but did not clarify whether a low carrier level was necessary to evoke the effect. Modulation thresholds in CI listeners generally decrease with increasing carrier level. The experiments in this study were designed to investigate whether the observed noise-induced enhancement is related to the low carrier level per se, or to the poor modulation sensitivity that accompanies it. This was done by keeping the carrier amplitude fixed at a moderate level and increasing modulation frequency so that modulation sensitivity could be reduced without lowering carrier level. The results suggest that modulation sensitivity, not carrier level, is the primary factor determining the effect of the noise.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16158655     DOI: 10.1121/1.1929258

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


  14 in total

1.  The effect of Gaussian noise on the threshold, dynamic range, and loudness of analogue cochlear implant stimuli.

Authors:  Robert P Morse; Peter F Morse; Terry B Nunn; Karen A M Archer; Patrick Boyle
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-12-12

2.  Amplitude modulation and loudness in cochlear implantees.

Authors:  Colette M McKay; Katherine R Henshall
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-10-02

3.  Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Cherish Oberzut
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The effect of presentation level and stimulation rate on speech perception and modulation detection for cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Tim Brochier; Hugh J McDermott; Colette M McKay
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Modulation frequency discrimination with single and multiple channels in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Sandy Oba; Deniz Başkent; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 6.  Auditory implant research at the House Ear Institute 1989-2013.

Authors:  Robert V Shannon
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-11-17       Impact factor: 3.208

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

9.  A method to dynamically control unwanted loudness cues when measuring amplitude modulation detection in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu; Sandy Oba; Deniz Başkent
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.390

10.  Temporal modulation transfer functions in cochlear implantees using a method that limits overall loudness cues.

Authors:  Matthew Fraser; Colette M McKay
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.