Literature DB >> 21689048

A music quality rating test battery for cochlear implant users to compare the FSP and HDCIS strategies for music appreciation.

Valerie Looi1, Philip Winter, Ilona Anderson, Catherine Sucher.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a music quality rating test battery (MQRTB) and pilot test it by comparing appraisal ratings from cochlear implant (CI) recipients using the fine-structure processing (FSP) and high-definition continuous interleaved sampling (HDCIS) speech processing strategies.
DESIGN: The development of the MQRTB involved three stages: (1) Selection of test items for the MQRTB; (2) Verification of its length and complexity with normally-hearing individuals; and (3) Pilot testing with CI recipients. STUDY SAMPLE: Part 1 involved 65 adult listeners, Part 2 involved 10 normally-hearing adults, and Part 3 involved five adult MED-EL CI recipients.
RESULTS: The MQRTB consisted of ten songs, with ratings made on scales assessing pleasantness, naturalness, richness, fullness, sharpness, and roughness. Results of the pilot study, which compared FSP and HDCIS for music, indicated that acclimatization to a strategy had a significant effect on ratings (p < 0.05). When acclimatized to FSP, the group rated FSP as closer to 'exactly as I want it to sound' than HDCIS (p < 0.05), and that HDCIS sounded significantly sharper and rougher than FSP. However when acclimatized to HDCIS, there were no significant differences between ratings. There was no effect of song familiarity or genre on ratings.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall the results suggest that the use of FSP as the default strategy for MED-EL recipients would have a positive effect on music appreciation, and that the MQRTB is an effective tool for assessing music sound quality.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21689048     DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2011.562246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Audiol        ISSN: 1499-2027            Impact factor:   2.117


  7 in total

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

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

2.  The effect of symmetrical and asymmetrical hearing impairment on music quality perception.

Authors:  Yuexin Cai; Fei Zhao; Yuebo Chen; Maojin Liang; Ling Chen; Haidi Yang; Hao Xiong; Xueyuan Zhang; Yiqing Zheng
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Musical sound quality impairments in cochlear implant (CI) users as a function of limited high-frequency perception.

Authors:  Alexis T Roy; Patpong Jiradejvong; Courtney Carver; Charles J Limb
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-11-19

4.  Musical Sound Quality as a Function of the Number of Channels in Modern Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Katelyn Berg; Jack Noble; Benoit Dawant; Robert Dwyer; Robert Labadie; Virginia Richards; René Gifford
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 4.677

5.  Effect of Frequency Response Manipulations on Musical Sound Quality for Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Jonathan Mo; Nicole T Jiam; Mickael L D Deroche; Patpong Jiradejvong; Charles J Limb
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.496

6.  Musical training software for children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  W Di Nardo; L Schinaia; R Anzivino; E De Corso; A Ciacciarelli; G Paludetti
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.124

7.  Music Engineering as a Novel Strategy for Enhancing Music Enjoyment in the Cochlear Implant Recipient.

Authors:  Gavriel D Kohlberg; Dean M Mancuso; Divya A Chari; Anil K Lalwani
Journal:  Behav Neurol       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 3.342

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.