Literature DB >> 22398954

Psychoacoustic performance and music and speech perception in prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.

Kyu Hwan Jung1, Jong Ho Won, Ward R Drennan, Elyse Jameyson, Gary Miyasaki, Susan J Norton, Jay T Rubinstein.   

Abstract

The number of pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients has increased substantially over the past 10 years, and it has become more important to understand the underlying mechanisms of the variable outcomes in this population. In this study, psychoacoustic measures of spectral-ripple and Schroeder-phase discrimination, the Clinical Assessment of Music Perception, and consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word recognition in quiet and spondee reception threshold (SRT) in noise tests have been presented to 11 prelingually deafened CI users, aged 8-16 years with at least 5 years of CI experience. The children's performance was compared to the previously reported results of postlingually deafened adult CI users. The average spectral-ripple threshold (n = 10) was 2.08 ripples/octave. The average Schroeder-phase discrimination was 67.3% for 50 Hz and 56.5% for 200 Hz (n = 9). The Clinical Assessment of Music Perception test showed that the average complex pitch direction discrimination was 2.98 semitones. The mean melody score was at a chance level, and the mean timbre score was 34.1% correct. The mean CNC word recognition score was 68.6%, and the mean SRT in steady noise was -8.5 dB SNR. The children's spectral-ripple resolution, CNC word recognition, and SRT in noise performances were, within statistical bounds, the same as in a population of postlingually deafened adult CI users. However, Schroeder-phase discrimination and music perception were generally poorer than in the adults. It is possible then that this poorer performance seen in the children might be partly accounted for by the delayed maturation in their temporal processing ability, and because of this, the children's performance may have been driven more by their spectral sensitivity.
Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22398954      PMCID: PMC3375765          DOI: 10.1159/000336407

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Audiol Neurootol        ISSN: 1420-3030            Impact factor:   1.854


  30 in total

1.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception.

Authors:  Zachary M Smith; Bertrand Delgutte; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-03-07       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Discrimination of Schroeder-phase harmonic complexes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jeff K Longnion; Chad Ruffin; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-12-08

3.  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

4.  Benefit of high-rate envelope cues in vocoder processing: effect of number of channels and spectral region.

Authors:  Michael A Stone; Christian Füllgrabe; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Pre-lingually deaf children can perform as well as post-lingually deaf adults using cochlear implants.

Authors:  R S Tyler; J T Rubinstein; H Teagle; D Kelsay; B J Gantz
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2000-03

6.  Spectral modulation detection and vowel and consonant identifications in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Aniket A Saoji; Leonid Litvak; Anthony J Spahr; David A Eddins
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  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

8.  Temporal window shape as a function of frequency and level.

Authors:  C J Plack; B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Cochlear implant candidacy in the United States: prevalence in children 12 months to 6 years of age.

Authors:  Tamala Bradham; Julibeth Jones
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-04-22       Impact factor: 1.675

10.  Clinical assessment of music perception in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Grace L Nimmons; Robert S Kang; Ward R Drennan; Jeff Longnion; Chad Ruffin; Tina Worman; Bevan Yueh; Jay T Rubenstien
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.311

View more
  25 in total

1.  Effects of age and hearing mechanism on spectral resolution in normal hearing and cochlear-implanted listeners.

Authors:  David L Horn; Daniel J Dudley; Kavita Dedhia; Kaibao Nie; Ward R Drennan; Jong Ho Won; Jay T Rubinstein; Lynne A Werner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Acoustic temporal modulation detection in normal-hearing and cochlear implanted listeners: effects of hearing mechanism and development.

Authors:  Min-Hyun Park; Jong Ho Won; David L Horn; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-03-20

3.  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

4.  Waiting for lexical access: Cochlear implants or severely degraded input lead listeners to process speech less incrementally.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; Ashley Farris-Trimble; Hannah Rigler
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2017-09-14

5.  Spectral Ripple Discrimination in Normal-Hearing Infants.

Authors:  David L Horn; Jong Ho Won; Jay T Rubinstein; Lynne A Werner
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 6.  Spectral Resolution Development in Children With Normal Hearing and With Cochlear Implants: A Review of Behavioral Studies.

Authors:  Kelly N Jahn; Julie G Arenberg; David L Horn
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 2.674

7.  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

8.  Bimodal Benefit for Music Perception: Effect of Acoustic Bandwidth.

Authors:  Kristen L D'Onofrio; René H Gifford
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 9.  Assessment of music experience after cochlear implantation: A review of current tools and their utilization.

Authors:  Tiffany P Hwa; Christopher Z Wen; Michael J Ruckenstein
Journal:  World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2021-04-03

10.  Children using cochlear implants capitalize on acoustical hearing for music perception.

Authors:  Talar Hopyan; Isabelle Peretz; Lisa P Chan; Blake C Papsin; Karen A Gordon
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-10-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.