Effect of stimulation rate on speech perception in adult users of the Med-EI CIS speech processing strategy

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 58-63

  Verschnuur, C A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Categorical perception; Cochlear implants; Phonetics; Profound hearing loss; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH REHABILITATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORD RECOGNITION;

ADULT; AGED; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; CUES; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; SOFTWARE; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 14944346197     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14992020400022488     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bench, J., Kowal, A. & Bamford, J. 1979. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal- Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol, 13, 108-112.
2. Brill, S.M., Gstottner, W., Helms, J., von Ilberg, C., Baumgartner, W., Muller, J., et al. 1997. Optimization of channel number and stimulation rate for the fast continuous interleaved sampling strategy in the COMBI 40+. Am J Otol, 18, S104-S106.
3. Busby, P.A., Tong, Y.C. & Clark, G.M. 1993. The perception of temporal modulations by cochlear implant patients. J Acoust Soc Am, 94, 124-131.
4. Dawson, P.W., McKay, C.M., Busby, P.A., Grayden, D.B. & Clark, G.M. 2000. Electrode discrimination and speech perception in young children using cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 21, 597-607.
5. Donaldson, G.S. & Nelson, D.A. 2000. Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 1645-1658.
6. Dorman, M.F., Dankowski, K., McCandless, G., Parkin, J.L. & Smith, L. 1991. Vowel and consonant recognition with the aid of a multichannel cochlear implant. Q J Exp Psychol A, 43, 585-601.
7. Dorman, M.F. & Loizou, P.C. 1996. Relative spectral change and formant transitions as cues to labial and alveolar place of articulation. J Acoust Soc Am, 100, 3825-3830.
8. Dorman, M.F. & Loizou, P.C. 1997. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants. Am J Otol, 18, S113-S114.
9. Dorman, M.F. & Loizou, P.C. 1998. The identification of consonants and vowels by cochlear implant patients using a 6-channel continuous interleaved sampling processor and by normal-hearing subjects using simulations of processors with two to nine channels. Ear Hear, 19, 162-166.
10. Dorman, M.F., Loizou, P.C., Kemp, L.L. & Kirk, K.I. 2000. Word recognition by children listening to speech processed into a small number of channels: data from normal-hearing children and children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 21, 590-596.
11. Dorman, M.F., Soli, S., Dankowski, K., Smith, L.M., McCandless, G. & Parkin, J. 1990. Acoustic cues for consonant identification by patients who use the Ineraid cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 2074-2079.
12. Friesen, L.M., Shannon, R.V. & Slattery, W.H., III 1999. The effect of frequency allocation on phoneme recognition with the nucleus 22 cochlear implant. Am J Otol, 20, 729-734.
13. Fu, Q.J. & Shannon, R.V. 1999a. Effect of acoustic dynamic range on phoneme recognition in quiet and noise by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 106, L65-L70.
14. Fu, Q.J. & Shannon, R.V. 1999b. Phoneme recognition by cochlear implant users as a function of signal- to-noise ratio and nonlinear amplitude mapping. J Acoust Soc Am, 106, L18-L23.
15. Fu, Q.J. & Shannon, R.V. 2000. Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition by nucleus-22 cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 589-597.
16. Hescot, F., Lorenzi, C., Debruille, X. & Camus, J.F. 2000. Measurement of the temporal-modulation transfer function for a single listener with cochlear hearing loss and left-hemisphere damage. Br J Audiol, 34, 341-351.
17. Iverson, P. 2003. Evaluating the function of phonetic perceptual phenomena within speech recognition: an examination of the perception of /d/-/t/ by adult cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 1056-1064.
18. Loizou, P.C., Dorman, M. & Tu, Z. 1999. On the number of channels needed to understand speech. J Acoust Soc Am, 106, 2097-2103.
19. Loizou, P.C. & Poroy, O. 2001. Minimum spectral contrast needed for vowel identification by normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 1619-1627.
20. Loizou, P.C., Poroy, O. & Dorman, M. 2000. The effect of parametric variations of cochlear implant processors on speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am, 108, 790-802.
21. Pisoni, D.B. 2000. Cognitive factors and cochlear implants: some thoughts on perception, learning, and memory in speech perception. Ear Hear, 21, 70-78.
22. Raffin, M.J. & Thornton, A.R. 1979. Confidence levels for differences between speech-discrimination scores: A research note. J Speech Hear Res, 23, 5-18.
23. Rubinstein, J.T., Wilson, B.S., Finley, C.C. & Abbas, P.J. 1999. Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation. Hear Res, 127, 108-118.
24. Shannon, R.V. 1992. Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 2156-2164.
25. Shannon, R.V., Zeng, F.G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J. & Ekelid, M. 1995. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science, 270, 303-304.
26. Van Tasell, D.J., Greenfield, D.G., Logemann, J.J. & Nelson, D.A. 1992. Temporal cues for consonant recognition: training, talker generalization, and use in evaluation of cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 92, 1247-1257.
27. Van Tasell, D.J., Soli, S.D., Kirby, V.M. & Widin, G.P. 1987. Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. J Acoust Soc Am, 82, 1152-1161.
28. Vandali, A.E., Whitford, L.A., Plant, K.L. & Clark, G.M. 2000. Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear, 21, 608-624.
29. Wilson, B.S., Finley, C.C., Lawson, D.T. & Zerbi, M. 1997. Temporal representations with cochlear implants. Am J Otol, 18, S30-S34.