Literature DB >> 18469714

Music perception by cochlear implant and normal hearing listeners as measured by the Montreal Battery for Evaluation of Amusia.

William B Cooper1, Emily Tobey, Philipos C Loizou.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to explore the utility/possibility of using the Montreal Battery for Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA) test (Peretz, et al., Ann N Y Acad Sci, 999, 58-75) to assess the music perception abilities of cochlear implant (CI) users.
DESIGN: The MBEA was used to measure six different aspects of music perception (Scale, Contour, Interval, Rhythm, Meter, and Melody Memory) by CI users and normal-hearing (NH) listeners presented with stimuli processed via CI simulations. The spectral resolution (number of channels) was varied in the CI simulations to determine: (a) the number of channels (4, 6, 8, 12, and 16) needed to achieve the highest levels of music perception and (b) the number of channels needed to produce levels of music perception performance comparable with that of CI users.
RESULTS: CI users and NH listeners performed higher on temporal-based tests (Rhythm and Meter) than on pitch-based tests (Scale, Contour, and Interval)--a finding that is consistent with previous research studies. The CI users' scores on pitch-based tests were near chance. The CI users' (but not NH listeners') scores for the Memory test, a test that incorporates an integration of both temporal-based and pitch-based aspects of music, were significantly higher than the scores obtained for the pitch-based Scale test and significantly lower than the temporal-based Rhythm and Meter tests. The data from NH listeners indicated that 16 channels of stimulation did not provide the highest music perception scores and performance was as good as that obtained with 12 channels. This outcome is consistent with other studies showing that NH listeners listening to vocoded speech are not able to use effectively F0 cues present in the envelopes, even when the stimuli are processed with a large number (16) of channels. The CI user data seem to most closely match with the 4- and 6-channel NH listener conditions for the pitch-based tasks.
CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies, both CI users and NH listeners showed the typical pattern of music perception in which scores are higher on tests measuring the perception of temporal aspects of music (Rhythm and Meter) than spectral (pitch) aspects of music (Scale, Contour, and Interval). On that regard, the pattern of results from this study indicates that the MBEA is a suitable test for measuring various aspects of music perception by CI users.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18469714      PMCID: PMC2676841          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318174e787

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  29 in total

1.  Ability of nucleus cochlear implantees to recognize music.

Authors:  S Fujita; J Ito
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 1.547

2.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception.

Authors:  Zachary M Smith; Bertrand Delgutte; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-03-07       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  MED-EL Combi40+ cochlear implantation in adults.

Authors:  Marc K Bassim; Emily Buss; Marcia S Clark; Karen A Kolln; Carol H Pillsbury; Harold C Pillsbury; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Effects of envelope-vocoder processing on F0 discrimination and concurrent-vowel identification.

Authors:  Michael K Qin; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Melodic, rhythmic, and timbral perception of adult cochlear implant users.

Authors:  K Gfeller; C R Lansing
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1991-08

6.  Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues.

Authors:  R V Shannon; F G Zeng; V Kamath; J Wygonski; M Ekelid
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-10-13       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Intonation of musical intervals by musical intervals by deaf subjects stimulated with single bipolar cochlear implant electrodes.

Authors:  S Pijl; D W Schwarz
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Labeling of musical interval size by cochlear implant patients and normally hearing subjects.

Authors:  S Pijl
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  Varieties of musical disorders. The Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia.

Authors:  Isabelle Peretz; Annie Sophie Champod; Krista Hyde
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.691

10.  Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu; Geraldine Nogaki
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  35 in total

1.  Melody identification for cochlear implant users and normal hearers using expanded pitch contours.

Authors:  Frank Michael Digeser; Anne Hast; Thomas Wesarg; Horst Hessel; Ulrich Hoppe
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Preservation of rhythmic clocking in cochlear implant users: a study of isochronous versus anisochronous beat detection.

Authors:  Irene Kim; Eunice Yang; Patrick J Donnelly; Charles J Limb
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-09

3.  Music perception and appraisal: cochlear implant users and simulated cochlear implant listening.

Authors:  Rose Wright; Rosalie M Uchanski
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Vocal singing by prelingually-deafened children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Li Xu; Ning Zhou; Xiuwu Chen; Yongxin Li; Heather M Schultz; Xiaoyan Zhao; Demin Han
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-06-26       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Characteristics and determinants of music appreciation in adult CI users.

Authors:  Birgit Philips; Bart Vinck; Eddy De Vel; Leen Maes; Wendy D'Haenens; Hannah Keppler; Ingeborg Dhooge
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Beyond Technology: The Interaction of Perceptual Accuracy and Experiential Factors in Pediatric Music Engagement.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Virginia Driscoll; Adam Schwalje
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Melodic interval perception by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Megan E Masterson; Ching-Chih Wu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Effects of age on melody and timbre perception in simulations of electro-acoustic and cochlear-implant hearing.

Authors:  Kathryn H Arehart; Naomi B H Croghan; Ramesh Kumar Muralimanohar
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Comparison of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant users on speech recognition with competing talker, music perception, affective prosody discrimination, and talker identification.

Authors:  Helen E Cullington; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Melodic pitch perception and lexical tone perception in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Duoduo Tao; Rui Deng; Ye Jiang; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu; Bing Chen
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.