Literature DB >> 7963020

Low-pass filtering in amplitude modulation detection associated with vowel and consonant identification in subjects with cochlear implants.

Y Cazals1, M Pelizzone, O Saudan, C Boex.   

Abstract

Temporal auditory analysis of acoustic events in various frequency channels is influenced by the ability to detect amplitude modulations which for normal hearing involves low-pass filtering with a cutoff frequency around 100 Hz and a rejection slope of about 10 dB per decade. These characteristics were established in previous studies measuring modulation transfer functions. For cochlear implant subjects, the delivery of detailed amplitude modulation information has been recently shown to result in very significant improvements in speech understanding. Several previous studies on cochlear implant subjects have reported capacities for temporal resolution rather equivalent to those of normally hearing subjects but with some notable individual differences. Recently two studies on some cochlear implant subjects indicated modulation transfer functions often quite similar to those of normal hearing but exhibiting marked individual differences in shape and absolute sensitivity. The present study compared amplitude modulation detection and phonetic recognition in a group of cochlear implant subjects to determine the extent to which the two tasks are correlated. Nine individuals who had been implanted with an Ineraid device and who demonstrated open speech understanding ranging from excellent to poor were chosen and tested in the present study. For each subject modulation transfer functions were measured at the most apical electrode and phonetic recognition of isolated vowels and intervocalic consonants was assessed. Results showed a strong correlation between the depth of high-frequency rejection in modulation transfer functions and success in vowel and consonant intelligibility. These results emphasize the importance of temporal speech features and offer perspectives for customizing signal processing in cochlear implants.

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7963020     DOI: 10.1121/1.410146

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


  54 in total

1.  Psychoacoustic performance and music and speech perception in prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Kyu Hwan Jung; Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Elyse Jameyson; Gary Miyasaki; Susan J Norton; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2012-03-03       Impact factor: 1.854

2.  Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor MAPs in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Teresa A Zwolan; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2013-07-20       Impact factor: 1.854

3.  Do adults with cochlear implants rely on different acoustic cues for phoneme perception than adults with normal hearing?

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly; Joanna H Lowenstein; Eric Tarr; Amanda Caldwell-Tarr; D Bradley Welling; Antoine J Shahin; Susan Nittrouer
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Encoding and decoding amplitude-modulated cochlear implant stimuli--a point process analysis.

Authors:  Joshua H Goldwyn; Eric Shea-Brown; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 1.621

5.  Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-09

6.  Discrimination of Schroeder-phase harmonic complexes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jeff K Longnion; Chad Ruffin; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-12-08

7.  Maximizing cochlear implant patients' performance with advanced speech training procedures.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; John J Galvin
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-12-08       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Speech recognition and temporal amplitude modulation processing by Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Qian-Jie Fu; Chao-Gang Wei; Ke-Li Cao
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Jian Yu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  Trends in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2004
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.