Effects of stimulation rate on speech recognition with cochlear implants

Audiology and Neurotology

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 169-184

  Friesen, Lendra M ^a,b   Shannon, Robert V ^a   Cruz, Rachel J ^a  

^a HOUSE EAR INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochlear implants; High rate stimulation; Speech processing; Speech recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONSONANT; ELECTRODE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHONEME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SPEECH; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VOWEL; WORD RECOGNITION;

ADULT; AGED; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; ELECTRIC STIMULATION THERAPY; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OTOSCLEROSIS; PHONETICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 18644380083     PISSN: 14203030     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000084027     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Advanced Bionics: Bionic Ear Programming System. Valencia, Advanced Bionics, 2001.
2. Blamey PJ, Dowell RC, Tong YC, Clark GM: An acoustic model of a multiple channel cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am 1984;76:97-104.
3. Brill S, Gstöttner W, Helms J, von Ilberg C, Baumgartener W, Müller J, Keifer J: Optimization of channel number and stimulation rate for the fast continuous interleaved sampling strategy in the Combi 40+. Am J Otol Suppl 1997;18:S104-S106.
4. Brill SM, Hochmair I, Hochmair ES: The importance of stimulation rate in pulsatile stimulation strategies in cochlear implants. 24th International Congress of Audiology, Buenos Aires, 1998a.
5. Brill SM, Schatzer R, Nopp P, Hochmair I, Hochmair ES: JCIS:CIS with temporally jittering stimulation pulses: Effect of jittering amplitude and stimulation rate on speech understanding. 4th European Symposium on Paediatric Cochlear Implantation, s-Hertogenbosch, 1998b.
6. Buchner A, Gärtner L, Battmer R-D, Lenarz T: Clinical validation of the nucleus ESPrit 3G Speech Processor. 7th International Cochlear Implant Conference, Manchester, 2002.
7. Burns EM, Viemeister NF: Nonspectral pitch. J Acoust Soc Am 1976;60:863-869.
8. Burns EM, Viemeister NF: Played-again SAM: Further observations on the pitch of amplitude-modulated noise, J Acoust Soc Am 1981;70:1655-1660.
9. Carlyon R, van Wieringen A, Long CJ, Deeks JM, Wouters J: Temporal pitch mechanisms in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2002;112:621-633.
10. Clarion by Advanced Bionics: SCLIN 98 for Windows Device Fitting Manual. Sylmar, Clarion, 1998.
11. Chatterjee M, Robert ME: Noise enhances modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant listeners: Stochastic resonance in a prosthetic sensory system? J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2001;2:159-171.
12. Cochlear Corporation: Audiologist Handbook. Englewood, Cochlear Corporation, 1995.
13. Cochlear Corporation: Nucleus Technical Reference Manual. Englewood, Cochlear Corporation, 1999.
14. Dorman MF, Loizou PC: Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants. Am J Otol 1997; 18(suppl): S113-S114.
15. Dorman MF, Loizou PC: 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 1998;19:162-166.
16. Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Fitzke J, Tu Z: The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104:3583-3585.
17. Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Rainey D: Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;102:2403-2411.
18. Drullman R, Festen JM, Plomp R: Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 1994;95:2670-2680.
19. Eddington DK, Dobelle WH, Brackmann DE, Mladevosky MG, Parkin JL: Auditory prosthesis research with multiple channel intracochlear stimulation in man. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1978;87(suppl):1-39.
20. Eddington DK, Rabinowitz WR, Tierney J, Noel V, Whearty M: Speech Processors for Auditory Prostheses. Eighth Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Contract N01-DC-6-2100, 1997.
21. Fishman KA, Shannon RV, Slattery WH: Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. J Speech Hear Res 1997;40:1201-1215.
22. Friesen L, Shannon RV, Baskent D, Wang X: Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: Comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants, J Acoust Soc Am 2001;110:1150-1163.
23. Fu Q-J, Shannon RV: Effects of amplitude nonlinearity on phoneme recognition by cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104:2570-2577.
24. Fu Q-J, Shannon RV: Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:589-597.
25. Fu Q-J, Shannon RV, Wang X: Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: Acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104:3586-3596.
26. Hill FJ, McRae LP, McClellan RP: Speech recognition as a function of channel capacity in a discrete set of channels. J Acoust Soc Am 1968;44:13-18.
27. Hillenbrand J, Getty L, Clark M, Wheeler K: Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;97:3099-3111.
28. Holden LK, Skinner MW, Holden TA, Demorest ME: Effects of stimulation rate with the Nucleus 24 ACE speech coding strategy. Ear Hear 2002;23:463-476.
29. House Ear Institute, Cochlear Corp: Minimum Speech Test Battery for Adult Cochlear Implant Users CD. House Ear Institute, Cochlear Corporation, 1996.
30. Kiefer J, von Illberg C, Rupprecht V, Huber-Egener J, Knecht R: Optimized speech understanding with the continuous interleaved sampling speech coding strategy in patients with cochlear implants: Effect of variations in stimulation rate and number of channels. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2000;109:1009-1020.
31. Lawson DT, Wilson BS, Zerbi M, Finley CC: Speech processors for auditory prostheses. Third Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Contract N01-DC-5-2103, 1996.
32. Litvak LM, Delgutte B, Eddington DK: Auditory nerve fiber responses to electrical stimulation: Modulated and unmodulated pulse trains. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;10:368-379.
33. Litvak LM, Delgutte B, Eddington DK: Desynchronization of electrically evoked auditory-nerve activity by high-frequency pulse trains of long duration. J Acoust Soc Am 2003a;114:2066-2078.
34. Litvak LM, Delgutte B, Eddington DK: Improved temporal coding of sinusoids in electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve using desynchronizing pulse trains. J Acoust Soc Am 2003b;114:2079-2098.
35. Litvak LM, Delgutte B, Eddington DK: Improved neural representation of vowels in electrical stimulation using desynchronizing pulse trains. J Acoust Soc Am 2003c;114:2099-2111.
36. Loizou PC, Poroy O, Dorman M: The effect of parametric variations of cochlear implant processors on speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;108:790-802.
37. Miller G, Nicely P: An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J Acoust Soc Am 1955;27:338-352.
38. Morse RP, Evans EF: Enhancement of vowel coding for cochlear implants by addition of noise. Nat Med 1996;2:928-932.
39. Plomp R: The role of modulation in hearing; in Klinke R, Hartmann R (eds): Hearing - Physiological Bases and Psychophysics. Berlin, Springer, 1983, pp 270-276.
40. Robert ME: AIPSS-ID - Phoneme Identification Software. Los Angeles, House Ear Institute, 1997.
41. Rosen S: Temporal information in speech and its relevance for cochlear implants. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 1992;336:367.
42. Rubinstein JT, Wilson BS, Finley CC, Abbas PJ: Pseudospontaneous activity: Stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation. Hear Res 1999;127:108-118.
43. Shannon RV: Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear Res 1983;11:157-189.
44. Shannon RV, Jensvold A, Padilla M, Robert M, Wang X: Consonant recordings for speech testing. J Acoust Soc Am 1999;106:L71-L74.
45. Shannon RV, Zeng F-G, Kamath V, Wygonski J, Ekelid M: Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 1995;270:303-304.
46. Shannon RV, Zeng F-G, Wygonski J: Speech recognition with altered spectral distribution of envelope cues. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104: 2467-2476.
47. Simmons FB: Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. Arch Otolaryngol 1966;84:2-54.
48. Standards Publication No 297: IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements,1969, au-17 (3), pp 225-246.
49. Van Tasell DJ, Soli SD, Kirby VM, Widin GP: Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 1987;82:1152-1161.
50. Tong YC, Blamey PJ, Dowell RC, Clark GM: Psychophysical studies evaluating the feasibility of a speech processing strategy for a multiple-channel cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am 1983;74:73-80.
51. Tong YC, Clark GM: Absolute identification of electric pulse rates and electrode positions by cochlear implant patients. J Acoust Soc Am 1985;77:1881-1888.
52. Tong YC, Clark GM, Blamey PJ, Busby PA, Dowell RC: Psychophysical studies for two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients. J Acoust Soc Am 1982;71:153-160.
53. Townsend B, Cotter N, Van Compernolle D, White RL: Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1987;82:106-115.
54. Turner CW, Fabry DA, Barrett S, Horowitz AR: Detection and recognition of stop consonants by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1992;35:942-949.
55. Vandali AE, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Clark GM: Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: Using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear 2000;21:608-624.
56. Viemeister NF: Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. J Acoust Soc Am 1979;66:1364-1380.
57. Vischer M, Haenggeli A, Zhang J, Pelizzone M, Hausler R, Rouiller EM: Effect of high-frequency electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in an animal model of cochlear implants. Am J Otol Suppl 1997;18:S27-S29.
58. Wilson BS, Finley CC, Lawson D, Zerbi M: Temporal representations with cochlear implants. Am J Otol 1997;18:S30-S34.
59. Wilson BS, Wolford RD, Lawson DT: Speech Processors for Auditory Prostheses, Seventh Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Contract N01-DC-8-2105, June 2000.
60. Xu L, Tsai Y, Pfingst BE: Features of stimulation affecting tonal-speech perception: Implications for cochlear prostheses. J Acoust Soc Am 2002;112:247-258.