Literature DB >> 34972310

Adults with cochlear implants can use prosody to determine the clausal structure of spoken sentences.

Nicole M Amichetti1, Jonathan Neukam2, Alexander J Kinney1, Nicole Capach2, Samantha U March1, Mario A Svirsky2, Arthur Wingfield1.   

Abstract

Speech prosody, including pitch contour, word stress, pauses, and vowel lengthening, can aid the detection of the clausal structure of a multi-clause sentence and this, in turn, can help listeners determine the meaning. However, for cochlear implant (CI) users, the reduced acoustic richness of the signal raises the question of whether CI users may have difficulty using sentence prosody to detect syntactic clause boundaries within sentences or whether this ability is rescued by the redundancy of the prosodic features that normally co-occur at clause boundaries. Twenty-two CI users, ranging in age from 19 to 77 years old, recalled three types of sentences: sentences in which the prosodic pattern was appropriate to the location of a clause boundary within the sentence (congruent prosody), sentences with reduced prosodic information, or sentences in which the location of the clause boundary and the prosodic marking of a clause boundary were placed in conflict. The results showed the presence of congruent prosody to be associated with superior sentence recall and a reduced processing effort as indexed by the pupil dilation. The individual differences in a standard test of word recognition (consonant-nucleus-consonant score) were related to the recall accuracy as well as the processing effort. The outcomes are discussed in terms of the redundancy of the prosodic features, which normally accompany a clause boundary and processing effort.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34972310      PMCID: PMC8674009          DOI: 10.1121/10.0008899

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


  94 in total

1.  Effects of insertion depth of cochlear implant electrodes upon speech perception.

Authors:  Kumiko Yukawa; Lawrence Cohen; Peter Blamey; Brian Pyman; Viruch Tungvachirakul; Stephen O'Leary
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.854

2.  Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Jon K Shallop; Anna Mary Peterson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 1.854

3.  Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers.

Authors:  D H Klatt; L C Klatt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Speech prosody perception in cochlear implant users with and without residual hearing.

Authors:  Mathieu Marx; Christopher James; Jessica Foxton; Amandine Capber; Bernard Fraysse; Pascal Barone; Olivier Deguine
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  The Moderating Effect of Success Importance on the Relationship Between Listening Demand and Listening Effort.

Authors:  Michael Richter
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Hearing Impairment and Cognitive Energy: The Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL).

Authors:  M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller; Sophia E Kramer; Mark A Eckert; Brent Edwards; Benjamin W Y Hornsby; Larry E Humes; Ulrike Lemke; Thomas Lunner; Mohan Matthen; Carol L Mackersie; Graham Naylor; Natalie A Phillips; Michael Richter; Mary Rudner; Mitchell S Sommers; Kelly L Tremblay; Arthur Wingfield
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects.

Authors:  B Townshend; N Cotter; D Van Compernolle; R L White
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Age differences in veridical and reconstructive recall of syntactically and randomly segmented speech.

Authors:  A Wingfield; P A Tun; M J Rosen
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.077

9.  Pupillometry reveals processing load during spoken language comprehension.

Authors:  Paul E Engelhardt; Fernanda Ferreira; Elena G Patsenko
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 2.143

10.  Effort Not Speed Characterizes Comprehension of Spoken Sentences by Older Adults with Mild Hearing Impairment.

Authors:  Nicole D Ayasse; Amanda Lash; Arthur Wingfield
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 5.750

View more
  1 in total

1.  Children's Neural Sensitivity to Prosodic Features of Natural Speech and Its Significance to Speech Development in Cochlear Implanted Children.

Authors:  Yuebo Chen; Qinqin Luo; Maojin Liang; Leyan Gao; Jingwen Yang; Ruiyan Feng; Jiahao Liu; Guoxin Qiu; Yi Li; Yiqing Zheng; Shuo Lu
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-07-12       Impact factor: 5.152

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.