Literature DB >> 21895095

Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing.

Monita Chatterjee1, Cherish Oberzut.   

Abstract

Three experiments were designed to examine temporal envelope processing by cochlear implant (CI) listeners. In experiment 1, the hypothesis that listeners' modulation sensitivity would in part determine their ability to discriminate between temporal modulation rates was examined. Temporal modulation transfer functions (TMTFs) obtained in an amplitude modulation detection (AMD) task were compared to threshold functions obtained in an amplitude modulation rate discrimination (AMRD) task. Statistically significant nonlinear correlations were observed between the two measures. In experiment 2, results of loudness-balancing showed small increases in the loudness of modulated over unmodulated stimuli beyond a modulation depth of 16%. Results of experiment 3 indicated small but statistically significant effects of level-roving on the overall gain of the TMTF, but no impact of level-roving on the average shape of the TMTF across subjects. This suggested that level-roving simply increased the task difficulty for most listeners, but did not indicate increased use of intensity cues under more challenging conditions. Data obtained with one subject, however, suggested that the most sensitive listeners may derive some benefit from intensity cues in these tasks. Overall, results indicated that intensity cues did not play an important role in temporal envelope processing by the average CI listener.
© 2011 Acoustical Society of America

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21895095      PMCID: PMC3188971          DOI: 10.1121/1.3621445

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


  35 in total

1.  Consonant recordings for speech testing.

Authors:  R V Shannon; A Jensvold; M Padilla; M E Robert; X Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  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

3.  Processing F0 with cochlear implants: Modulation frequency discrimination and speech intonation recognition.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Shu-Chen Peng
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-11-23       Impact factor: 3.208

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.  Loudness of dynamic stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing.

Authors:  C Zhang; F G Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 1.840

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.  Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds.

Authors:  N F Viemeister
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Selective electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve activates a pathway specialized for high temporal acuity.

Authors:  John C Middlebrooks; Russell L Snyder
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-03       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Speech recognition and temporal amplitude modulation processing by Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Qian-Jie Fu; Chao-Gang Wei; Ke-Li Cao
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Enhancing temporal cues to voice pitch in continuous interleaved sampling cochlear implants.

Authors:  Tim Green; Andrew Faulkner; Stuart Rosen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  21 in total

1.  Band importance functions of listeners with cochlear implants using clinical maps.

Authors:  Adam K Bosen; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Is there a fundamental 300 Hz limit to pulse rate discrimination in cochlear implants?

Authors:  Pieter J Venter; Johan J Hanekom
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-06-19

3.  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

4.  Effects of rate and age in processing interaural time and level differences in normal-hearing and bilateral cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Sean R Anderson; Kyle Easter; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Temporal-pitch sensitivity in electric hearing with amplitude modulation and inserted pulses with short inter-pulse intervals.

Authors:  Martin J Lindenbeck; Bernhard Laback; Piotr Majdak; Sridhar Srinivasan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Fundamental-frequency discrimination using noise-band-vocoded harmonic complexes in older listeners with normal hearing.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Voice emotion recognition by cochlear-implanted children and their normally-hearing peers.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Danielle J Zion; Mickael L Deroche; Brooke A Burianek; Charles J Limb; Alison P Goren; Aditya M Kulkarni; Julie A Christensen
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  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

9.  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

10.  A method to dynamically control unwanted loudness cues when measuring amplitude modulation detection in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu; Sandy Oba; Deniz Başkent
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.