Literature DB >> 8609301

Frequency discrimination and speech recognition by patients who use the Ineraid and continuous interleaved sampling cochlear-implant signal processors.

M F Dorman1, L M Smith, M Smith, J L Parkin.   

Abstract

Patients who use the Ineraid cochlear implant were tested in four experiments with materials which assessed frequency discrimination and speech understanding. In each experiment both frequency discrimination and speech recognition varied among patients. Correlations between the two measures were significant and ranged from 0.60 to 0.83. Most generally, frequency discrimination was better in the frequency domain of F1 than in the domain of F2. In experiment 5, both the Ineraid signal processing strategy and a continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) strategy were implemented for a single patient. The CIS strategy improved frequency discrimination in the domain of F2 and improved speech understanding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8609301     DOI: 10.1121/1.414600

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


  10 in total

1.  Current research with cochlear implants at Arizona State University.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Anthony Spahr; Rene H Gifford; Sarah Cook; Ting Zhang; Louise Loiselle; William Yost; Lara Cardy; JoAnne Whittingham; David Schramm
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

2.  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

3.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Psychophysical performance and Mandarin tone recognition in noise by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Chaogang Wei; Keli Cao; Xin Jin; Xiaowei Chen; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Electrode interaction in pediatric cochlear implant subjects.

Authors:  Marc D Eisen; Kevin H Franck
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-06-10

6.  Discrimination of Stochastic Frequency Modulation by Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Stanley Sheft; Min-Yu Cheng; Valeriy Shafiro
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.664

7.  Detection of acoustic temporal fine structure by cochlear implant listeners: behavioral results and computational modeling.

Authors:  Nikita S Imennov; Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Elyse Jameyson; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future.

Authors:  Blake S Wilson; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-22       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Cochlear Place of Stimulation Is One Determinant of Cochlear Implant Sound Quality.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Sarah Cook Natale; Leslie Baxter; Daniel M Zeitler; Mathew L Carlson; Jack H Noble
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 1.854

10.  Correlation between Auditory Spectral Resolution and Speech Perception in Children with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Zahra Jeddi; Younes Lotfi; Abdollah Moossavi; Enayatollah Bakhshi; Seyed Basir Hashemi
Journal:  Iran J Med Sci       Date:  2019-09
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.