Literature DB >> 22588270

Sound localization in noise by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.

Stefan Kerber1, Bernhard U Seeber.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize horizontal plane sound localization in interfering noise at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and to compare performance across normal-hearing listeners and users of unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). CI users report difficulties with listening in noisy environments. Although their difficulties with speech understanding have been investigated in several studies, the ability to localize sounds in background noise has not extensively been examined, despite the benefits of binaural hearing being greatest in noisy situations. Sound localization is a measure of binaural processing and is thus well suited to assessing the benefit of bilateral implantation. The results will inform clinicians and implant manufacturers how to focus their efforts to improve localization with CIs in noisy situations.
DESIGN: Six normal-hearing listeners, four unilateral, and 10 bilateral CI users indicated the perceived location of sound sources using a light pointer method. Target sounds were noise pulses played from one of 11 loudspeakers placed between -80 and +80 degrees in the frontal horizontal plane in the free field. Localization was assessed in quiet and in diffuse background noise at SNRs between +10 and -7 dB. Speech reception thresholds were measured and their relation to the localization results examined.
RESULTS: Localization performance declined with decreasing SNR: target sounds were perceived closer to the median plane and the standard deviation of responses increased. Localization performance across groups was compared using a measure of "Spatial Resolvability" (SR). This measure gives the angular separation between two sound sources that would enable an ideal observer to correctly distinguish them 69.1% of the time. For all participants SR increased with decreasing SNR, that is, at low SNRs the spatial separation between sound sources remained distinguishable only when it was larger. Normal-hearing participants performed best, with SR between 1.4 and 5.1 degrees in quiet. Bilateral CI users showed SR between 8.3 and 43.6 degrees in quiet, corresponding approximately to the spatial resolution of normal-hearing listeners at an SNR of -5 dB. Most bilateral CI users had lost the ability to correctly determine which side the sound came from at an SNR of -3 dB. Overall, the SNR had to be at least +7 dB to achieve localization performance near to that in quiet for all bilateral CI users. No significant correlation was found between spatial resolution and speech reception thresholds, but the speech processor sensitivity setting did significantly affect performance. Unilateral CI users showed the most severe localization problems, with only two of four participants being able to correctly determine which side sounds came from in quiet.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to examine sound localization with CIs at various SNRs and to compare it with normal hearing. The results confirm that localization with CIs is strongly disrupted in noisy situations. Bilateral CIs were shown to be clearly superior over unilateral CIs for localization in quiet and in noisy situations. With bilateral CIs, localization declined at moderately high absolute noise levels (>63 dB SPL), suggesting that an extension of the acoustic-dynamic range to higher levels would be beneficial. The absence of a relation between speech reception thresholds and spatial resolution highlights the need for additional clinical tests to assess the binaural benefit of a second implant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22588270      PMCID: PMC3446659          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318257607b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  35 in total

1.  An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings.

Authors:  Chris J James; Margaret W Skinner; Lois F A Martin; Laura K Holden; Karyn L Galvin; Timothy A Holden; Lesley Whitford
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 2.  The development of the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear implant system.

Authors:  James F Patrick; Peter A Busby; Peter J Gibson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-12

3.  Sound localization. The interaction of aging, hearing loss and hearing protection.

Authors:  S M Abel; V H Hay
Journal:  Scand Audiol       Date:  1996

4.  Some benefits and limitations of binaural cochlear implants and our ability to measure them.

Authors:  Richard S Tyler; William Noble; Camille Dunn; Shelley Witt
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  The effect of noise on time-intensity trading in lateralization.

Authors:  H Gaskell; G B Henning
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Localization ability with bimodal hearing aids and bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bernhard U Seeber; Uwe Baumann; Hugo Fastl
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Spatial hearing and speech intelligibility in bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky; Aaron Parkinson; Jennifer Arcaroli
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future.

Authors:  Blake S Wilson; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-22       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Binaural unmasking with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Christopher J Long; Robert P Carlyon; Ruth Y Litovsky; Daniel H Downs
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-08-29

10.  The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ).

Authors:  Stuart Gatehouse; William Noble
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.117

View more
  40 in total

1.  Channel Interaction and Current Level Affect Across-Electrode Integration of Interaural Time Differences in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners.

Authors:  Katharina Egger; Piotr Majdak; Bernhard Laback
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-16

2.  Effect of multi-electrode configuration on sensitivity to interaural timing differences in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Heath G Jones; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A longitudinal study in adults with sequential bilateral cochlear implants: time course for individual ear and bilateral performance.

Authors:  Ruth M Reeder; Jill B Firszt; Laura K Holden; Michael J Strube
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Corey Stoelb; Ruth Y Litovsky; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Audio-visual speech intelligibility benefits with bilateral cochlear implants when talker location varies.

Authors:  Richard J M van Hoesel
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-01-13

6.  [Processing of interaural time differences in normal-hearing subjects and cochlear implant users with FSP and HDCIS coding strategy].

Authors:  N Heidekrüger; T Rahne; L Wagner
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  Auditory motion tracking ability of adults with normal hearing and with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Keng Moua; Alan Kan; Heath G Jones; Sara M Misurelli; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Spatial attention in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Lateralization of interaural timing differences with multi-electrode stimulation in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Heath G Jones; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Localization in reverberation with cochlear implants: predicting performance from basic psychophysical measures.

Authors:  Stefan Kerber; Bernhard U Seeber
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2013-02-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.