Literature DB >> 19798533

Amplitude modulation and loudness in cochlear implantees.

Colette M McKay1, Katherine R Henshall.   

Abstract

The effect of amplitude modulation of pulse trains on the loudness perceived by cochlear implantees was investigated for different overall levels of the signal, modulation depth and the carrier rate of the pulse train. Equally loud and threshold levels were determined for a variety of signal levels, modulation depths and carrier rates in six cochlear implantees. The pattern of results was consistent with the predictions of a previously published loudness model of McKay et al. (J Acoust Soc Am 113:2054-2063, 2003). The degree to which the loudness of modulated stimuli differed from the loudness elicited by an unmodulated pulse train with equivalent average current depended on the modulation depth and the absolute current level of the unmodulated stimulus. The effect of carrier rate on this measure was predictable solely from the effect of rate on absolute current level for equal loudness. The results have important implications for the interpretation of experiments measuring modulation detection that do not control loudness cues. We show that several previously published results regarding the effect of carrier rate and added noise on modulation detection could be reinterpreted in the light of these findings.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19798533      PMCID: PMC2820208          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-009-0188-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  22 in total

1.  Noise enhances modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant listeners: stochastic resonance in a prosthetic sensory system?

Authors:  M Chatterjee; M E Robert
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2001-06

2.  A practical method of predicting the loudness of complex electrical stimuli.

Authors:  Colette M McKay; Katherine R Henshall; Rebecca J Farrell; Hugh J McDermott
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Application of loudness models to sound processing for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Hugh J McDermott; Colette M McKay; Louise M Richardson; Katherine R Henshall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Temporal integration and multiple looks.

Authors:  N F Viemeister; G H Wakefield
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants.

Authors:  R V Shannon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants.

Authors:  R V Shannon
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Loudness-coding mechanisms inferred from electric stimulation of the human auditory system.

Authors:  F G Zeng; R V Shannon
Journal:  Science       Date:  1994-04-22       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  The perception of temporal modulations by cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  P A Busby; Y C Tong; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Influence of stimulation rate and loudness growth on modulation detection and intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2002-09-16       Impact factor: 1.837

View more
  23 in total

1.  Pitch contour identification with combined place and temporal cues using cochlear implants.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Monica Padilla; David M Landsberger
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Encoding and decoding amplitude-modulated cochlear implant stimuli--a point process analysis.

Authors:  Joshua H Goldwyn; Eric Shea-Brown; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 1.621

3.  Modulation rate discrimination using half-wave rectified and sinusoidally amplitude modulated stimuli in cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham; David A Nelson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of stimulus duration on amplitude modulation processing with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Xin Luo; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Kaibao Nie; Elyse M Jameyson; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  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

7.  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

8.  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

9.  Forward masking patterns by low and high-rate stimulation in cochlear implant users: Differences in masking effectiveness and spread of neural excitation.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Lixue Dong; Susannah Dixon
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-02-15       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Temporal processing in the auditory system: insights from cochlear and auditory midbrain implantees.

Authors:  Colette M McKay; Hubert H Lim; Thomas Lenarz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-10-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.