Literature DB >> 29450488

Spatial Release From Masking in Adults With Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Effects of Distracter Azimuth and Microphone Location.

Timothy J Davis1, René H Gifford1.   

Abstract

Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to derive spatial release from masking (SRM) performance-azimuth functions for bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users to provide a thorough description of SRM as a function of target/distracter spatial configuration. The secondary purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the microphone location for SRM in a within-subject study design. Method: Speech recognition was measured in 12 adults with bilateral CIs for 11 spatial separations ranging from -90° to +90° in 20° steps using an adaptive block design. Five of the 12 participants were tested with both the behind-the-ear microphones and a T-mic configuration to further investigate the effect of mic location on SRM.
Results: SRM can be significantly affected by the hemifield origin of the distracter stimulus-particularly for listeners with interaural asymmetry in speech understanding. The greatest SRM was observed with a distracter positioned 50° away from the target. There was no effect of mic location on SRM for the current experimental design.
Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that the traditional assessment of SRM with a distracter positioned at 90° azimuth may underestimate maximum performance for individuals with bilateral CIs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29450488      PMCID: PMC5963045          DOI: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-H-16-0441

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  47 in total

1.  Chronic electrical stimulation by a cochlear implant promotes survival of spiral ganglion neurons after neonatal deafness.

Authors:  P A Leake; G T Hradek; R L Snyder
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1999-10-04       Impact factor: 3.215

2.  A speech corpus for multitalker communications research.

Authors:  R S Bolia; W T Nelson; M A Ericson; B D Simpson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Contrasting benefits from contralateral implants and hearing aids in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Richard J M van Hoesel
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2011-12-30       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Effect of stimulation rate on cochlear implant users' phoneme, word and sentence recognition in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  Robert V Shannon; Rachel J Cruz; John J Galvin
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 1.854

5.  In-the-canal versus behind-the-ear microphones improve spatial discrimination on the side of the head in bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Georgios Mantokoudis; Martin Kompis; Mattheus Vischer; Rudolf Häusler; Marco Caversaccio; Pascal Senn
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Minimum audible angle, just noticeable interaural differences and speech intelligibility with bilateral cochlear implants using clinical speech processors.

Authors:  Pascal Senn; Martin Kompis; Mattheus Vischer; Rudolf Haeusler
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  The acoustical bright spot and mislocalization of tones by human listeners.

Authors:  Eric J Macaulay; William M Hartmann; Brad Rakerd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Cochlear implant microphone location affects speech recognition in diffuse noise.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Kolberg; Sterling W Sheffield; Timothy J Davis; Linsey W Sunderhaus; René H Gifford
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Speech recognition by bilateral cochlear implant users in a cocktail-party setting.

Authors:  Philipos C Loizou; Yi Hu; Ruth Litovsky; Gongqiang Yu; Robert Peters; Jennifer Lake; Peter Roland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Perception of Interaural Phase Differences With Envelope and Fine Structure Coding Strategies in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Stefan Zirn; Susan Arndt; Antje Aschendorff; Roland Laszig; Thomas Wesarg
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.293

View more
  2 in total

1.  Bilateral and bimodal cochlear implant listeners can segregate competing speech using talker sex cues, but not spatial cues.

Authors:  Shelby Willis; Kevin Xu; Mathew Thomas; Quinton Gopen; Akira Ishiyama; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  JASA Express Lett       Date:  2021-01

2.  Novel Approaches to Measure Spatial Release From Masking in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Z Ellen Peng; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.562

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.