Literature DB >> 20085197

Temporal stability of music perception and appraisal scores of adult cochlear implant recipients.

Kate Gfeller1, Dingfeng Jiang, Jacob J Oleson, Virginia Driscoll, John F Knutson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An extensive body of literature indicates that cochlear implants (CIs) are effective in supporting speech perception of persons with severe to profound hearing losses who do not benefit to any great extent from conventional hearing aids. Adult CI recipients tend to show significant improvement in speech perception within 3 mo following implantation as a result of mere experience. Furthermore, CI recipients continue to show modest improvement as long as 5yr postimplantation. In contrast, data taken from single testing protocols of music perception and appraisal indicate that CIs are less than ideal in transmitting important structural features of music, such as pitch, melody, and timbre. However, there is presently little information documenting changes in music perception or appraisal over extended time as a result of mere experience.
PURPOSE: This study examined two basic questions: (1) Do adult CI recipients show significant improvement in perceptual acuity or appraisal of specific music listening tasks when tested in two consecutive years? (2) If there are tasks for which CI recipients show significant improvement with time, are there particular demographic variables that predict those CI recipients most likely to show improvement with extended CI use? RESEARCH
DESIGN: A longitudinal cohort study. Implant recipients return annually for visits to the clinic. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 209 adult cochlear implant recipients with at least 9 mo implant experience before their first year measurement. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Outcomes were measured on the patient's annual visit in two consecutive years. Paired t-tests were used to test for significant improvement from one year to the next. Those variables demonstrating significant improvement were subjected to regression analyses performed to detect the demographic variables useful in predicting said improvement.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in music perception outcomes as a function of type of device or processing strategy used. Only familiar melody recognition (FMR) and recognition of melody excerpts with lyrics (MERT-L) showed significant improvement from one year to the next. After controlling for the baseline value, hearing aid use, months of use, music listening habits after implantation, and formal musical training in elementary school were significant predictors of FMR improvement. Bilateral CI use, formal musical training in high school and beyond, and a measure of sequential cognitive processing were significant predictors of MERT-L improvement.
CONCLUSION: These adult CI recipients as a result of mere experience demonstrated fairly consistent music perception and appraisal on measures gathered in two consecutive years. Gains made tend to be modest, and can be associated with characteristics such as use of hearing aids, listening experiences, or bilateral use (in the case of lyrics). These results have implications for counseling of CI recipients with regard to realistic expectations and strategies for enhancing music perception and enjoyment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20085197      PMCID: PMC2844251          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.21.1.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  31 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.  HUMAN ACQUISITION OF CONCEPTS FOR SEQUENTIAL PATTERNS.

Authors:  H A SIMON; K KOTOVSKY
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1963-11       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Relative contributions of temporal and place pitch cues to fundamental frequency discrimination in cochlear implantees.

Authors:  Johan Laneau; Jan Wouters; Marc Moonen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients on pitch perception, melody recognition, and speech reception in noise.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Christopher Turner; Jacob Oleson; Xuyang Zhang; Bruce Gantz; Rebecca Froman; Carol Olszewski
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-06       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.  Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation.

Authors:  J T Rubinstein; B S Wilson; C C Finley; P J Abbas
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Timbral recognition and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users and normal-hearing adults.

Authors:  K Gfeller; J F Knutson; G Woodworth; S Witt; B DeBus
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  Perception of rhythmic and sequential pitch patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users.

Authors:  K Gfeller; G Woodworth; D A Robin; S Witt; J F Knutson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  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

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
  20 in total

1.  Cochlear implants: the hazards of unexpected success.

Authors:  Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  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

3.  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

4.  A Randomized Controlled Crossover Study of the Impact of Online Music Training on Pitch and Timbre Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Nicole T Jiam; Mickael L Deroche; Patpong Jiradejvong; Charles J Limb
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2019-02-27

5.  The effects of musical and linguistic components in recognition of real-world musical excerpts by cochlear implant recipients and normal-hearing adults.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Dingfeng Jiang; Jacob J Oleson; Virginia Driscoll; Carol Olszewski; John F Knutson; Christopher Turner; Bruce Gantz
Journal:  J Music Ther       Date:  2012

6.  The impact of electric hearing on children's timbre and pitch perception and talker discrimination.

Authors:  Kristin M Sjoberg; Virginia D Driscoll; Kate Gfeller; Anne E Welhaven; Karen Iler Kirk; Lindsay Prusick
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2017-01-18

7.  MUSIC APPRECIATION AND TRAINING FOR COCHLEAR IMPLANT RECIPIENTS: A REVIEW.

Authors:  Valerie Looi; Kate Gfeller; Virginia Driscoll
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2012-11-19

8.  Speech intonation and melodic contour recognition in children with cochlear implants and with normal hearing.

Authors:  Rachel L See; Virginia D Driscoll; Kate Gfeller; Stephanie Kliethermes; Jacob Oleson
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients in speech reception in the presence of background music.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Christopher Turner; Jacob Oleson; Stephanie Kliethermes; Virginia Driscoll
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.547

10.  Clinical evaluation of music perception, appraisal and experience in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jacob J Oleson; Kate Gfeller; Jillian Crosson; Virginia D Driscoll; Jong Ho Won; Elizabeth S Anderson; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 2.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.