Literature DB >> 28578222

Using prosody to infer discourse prominence in cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.

Yi Ting Huang1, Rochelle S Newman2, Allison Catalano2, Matthew J Goupell2.   

Abstract

Cochlear implants (CIs) provide speech perception to adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss, but the acoustic signal remains severely degraded. Limited access to pitch cues is thought to decrease sensitivity to prosody in CI users, but co-occurring changes in intensity and duration may provide redundant cues. The current study investigates how listeners use these cues to infer discourse prominence. CI users and normal-hearing (NH) listeners were presented with sentences varying in prosody (accented vs. unaccented words) while their eye-movements were measured to referents varying in discourse status (given vs. new categories). In Experiment 1, all listeners inferred prominence when prosody on nouns distinguished categories ("SANDWICH"→not sandals). In Experiment 2, CI users and NH listeners presented with natural speech inferred prominence when prosody on adjectives implied contrast across both categories and properties ("PINK horse"→not the orange horse). In contrast, NH listeners presented with simulated CI (vocoded) speech were sensitive to acoustic differences in prosody, but did not use these cues to infer discourse status. Together, this suggests that exploiting redundant cues for comprehension varies with the demands of language processing and prior experience with the degraded signal.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acoustic cues; Cochlear implants; Discourse prominence; Eye-tracking; Prosody

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28578222      PMCID: PMC5541397          DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.05.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  59 in total

1.  Speech recognition with altered spectral distribution of envelope cues.

Authors:  R V Shannon; F G Zeng; J Wygonski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  S Rosen; A Faulkner; L Wilkinson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

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.  Vocal emotion recognition by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; John J Galvin
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-12

5.  Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates.

Authors:  Janice Leung; Nae-Yuh Wang; Jennifer D Yeagle; Jill Chinnici; Stephen Bowditch; Howard W Francis; John K Niparko
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2005-12

6.  The weckud wetch of the wast: lexical adaptation to a novel accent.

Authors:  Jessica Maye; Richard N Aslin; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-04-05

7.  Working Memory Spans as Predictors of Spoken Word Recognition and Receptive Vocabulary in Children with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Miranda Cleary; David B Pisoni; Karen Iler Kirk
Journal:  Volta Rev       Date:  2000

8.  Complex working memory span in cochlear implanted and normal hearing teenagers.

Authors:  Ann E Geers; David B Pisoni; Christine Brenner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Accent detection is a slippery slope: Direction and rate of F0 change drives listeners' comprehension.

Authors:  Angela M Isaacs; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2010-01-01

10.  The Impact of Auditory Spectral Resolution on Listening Effort Revealed by Pupil Dilation.

Authors:  Matthew B Winn; Jan R Edwards; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  3 in total

1.  Children's syntactic parsing and sentence comprehension with a degraded auditory signal.

Authors:  Isabel A Martin; Matthew J Goupell; Yi Ting Huang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Some inferences still take time: Prosody, predictability, and the speed of scalar implicatures.

Authors:  Yi Ting Huang; Jesse Snedeker
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Multimodal and Spectral Degradation Effects on Speech and Emotion Recognition in Adult Listeners.

Authors:  Chantel Ritter; Tara Vongpaisal
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.