Literature DB >> 21786905

Comparing spatial tuning curves, spectral ripple resolution, and speech perception in cochlear implant users.

Elizabeth S Anderson1, David A Nelson, Heather Kreft, Peggy B Nelson, Andrew J Oxenham.   

Abstract

Spectral ripple discrimination thresholds were measured in 15 cochlear-implant users with broadband (350-5600 Hz) and octave-band noise stimuli. The results were compared with spatial tuning curve (STC) bandwidths previously obtained from the same subjects. Spatial tuning curve bandwidths did not correlate significantly with broadband spectral ripple discrimination thresholds but did correlate significantly with ripple discrimination thresholds when the rippled noise was confined to an octave-wide passband, centered on the STC's probe electrode frequency allocation. Ripple discrimination thresholds were also measured for octave-band stimuli in four contiguous octaves, with center frequencies from 500 Hz to 4000 Hz. Substantial variations in thresholds with center frequency were found in individuals, but no general trends of increasing or decreasing resolution from apex to base were observed in the pooled data. Neither ripple nor STC measures correlated consistently with speech measures in noise and quiet in the sample of subjects in this study. Overall, the results suggest that spectral ripple discrimination measures provide a reasonable measure of spectral resolution that correlates well with more direct, but more time-consuming, measures of spectral resolution, but that such measures do not always provide a clear and robust predictor of performance in speech perception tasks.
© 2011 Acoustical Society of America

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21786905      PMCID: PMC3155592          DOI: 10.1121/1.3589255

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


  24 in total

1.  Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Belinda A Henry; Christopher W Turner; Amy Behrens
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Spectral modulation detection as a function of modulation frequency, carrier bandwidth, and carrier frequency region.

Authors:  David A Eddins; Eva M Bero
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Anthony J Spahr; Aniket A Saoji; Gene Y Fridman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Spectral modulation masking patterns reveal tuning to spectral envelope frequency.

Authors:  Aniket A Saoji; David A Eddins
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-06-21

6.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Frequency-temporal resolution of hearing measured by rippled noise.

Authors:  V V Popov; O N Milekhina; M B Tarakanov
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  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

9.  The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels.

Authors:  M F Dorman; P C Loizou; J Fitzke; Z Tu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation.

Authors:  A Kawano; H L Seldon; G M Clark; R T Ramsden; C H Raine
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.494

View more
  54 in total

1.  Evidence of across-channel processing for spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Gary L Jones; Ward R Drennan; Elyse M Jameyson; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Cochlear implant users' spectral ripple resolution.

Authors:  Eun Kyung Jeon; Christopher W Turner; Sue A Karsten; Belinda A Henry; Bruce J Gantz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.

Authors:  Matthew B Winn; Jong Ho Won; Il Joon Moon
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  The development of a modified spectral ripple test.

Authors:  Justin M Aronoff; David M Landsberger
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Clinical assessment of spectral modulation detection for adult cochlear implant recipients: a non-language based measure of performance outcomes.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Andrea Hedley-Williams; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 2.117

6.  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

7.  Comparison of the Spectral-Temporally Modulated Ripple Test With the Arizona Biomedical Institute Sentence Test in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Marshall Lawler; Jeffrey Yu; Justin M Aronoff
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Validation of a clinical assessment of spectral-ripple resolution for cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Elizabeth S Anderson; Jong Ho Won; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

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.  Nonlinguistic Outcome Measures in Adult Cochlear Implant Users Over the First Year of Implantation.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jong Ho Won; Alden O Timme; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.