Literature DB >> 22779486

Enhancement of temporal cues to pitch in cochlear implants: effects on pitch ranking.

Andrew E Vandali1, Richard J M van Hoesel.   

Abstract

The abilities to hear changes in pitch for sung vowels and understand speech using an experimental sound coding strategy (eTone) that enhanced coding of temporal fundamental frequency (F0) information were tested in six cochlear implant users, and compared with performance using their clinical (ACE) strategy. In addition, rate- and modulation rate-pitch difference limens (DLs) were measured using synthetic stimuli with F0s below 300 Hz to determine psychophysical abilities of each subject and to provide experience in attending to rate cues for the judgment of pitch. Sung-vowel pitch ranking tests for stimuli separated by three semitones presented across an F0 range of one octave (139-277 Hz) showed a significant benefit for the experimental strategy compared to ACE. Average d-prime (d') values for eTone (d' = 1.05) were approximately three time larger than for ACE (d' = 0.35). Similar scores for both strategies in the speech recognition tests showed that coding of segmental speech information by the experimental strategy was not degraded. Average F0 DLs were consistent with results from previous studies and for all subjects were less than or equal to approximately three semitones for F0s of 125 and 200 Hz.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22779486     DOI: 10.1121/1.4718452

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


  12 in total

1.  Correlations Between Pitch and Phoneme Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Their Normal Hearing Peers.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-15

2.  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

3.  Human Frequency Following Responses to Vocoded Speech.

Authors:  Saradha Ananthakrishnan; Xin Luo; Ananthanarayan Krishnan
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Stimulation Rate and Voice Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Damir Kovačić; Chris J James
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-08-02

5.  Advantages of Pulse Rate Compared to Modulation Frequency for Temporal Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy; Susan R S Bissmeyer; Andres Camarena
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-03

Review 6.  The effectiveness of sound-processing strategies on tonal language cochlear implant users: A systematic review.

Authors:  Haihong Liu; Xiaoxia Peng; Yawen Zhao; Xin Ni
Journal:  Pediatr Investig       Date:  2017-12-27

7.  The effect of enhancing temporal periodicity cues on Cantonese tone recognition by cochlear implantees.

Authors:  Tan Lee; Shing Yu; Meng Yuan; Terence Ka Cheong Wong; Ying-Yee Kong
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 2.117

8.  The effect of a coding strategy that removes temporally masked pulses on speech perception by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Wiebke Lamping; Tobias Goehring; Jeremy Marozeau; Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Pitch perception is more robust to interference and better resolved when provided by pulse rate than by modulation frequency of cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy; Andres Camarena; Susan R S Bissmeyer
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 3.672

10.  Cochlear Implant Rate Pitch and Melody Perception as a Function of Place and Number of Electrodes.

Authors:  Vijay Marimuthu; Brett A Swanson; Robert Mannell
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.