Cochlear implant speech processor frequency allocations may influence pitch perception

Otology and Neurotology

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 160-167

  Reiss, Lina A J ^a   Gantz, Bruce J ^a   Turner, Christopher W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochlear implants; Hybrid; Pitch; Residual hearing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONSONANT; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRODE; HEARING; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

ADULT; AGED; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; ELECTRODES; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PITCH PERCEPTION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 38649125628     PISSN: 15317129     EISSN: 15374505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/mao.0b013e31815aedf4     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Rainey D. Simulating the effect of cochlear implant electrode insertion depth on speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;102:2993-6.
2. Fu QJ, Shannon RV. Recognition of spectrally degraded and frequency-shifted vowels in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1999;105:1889-900.
3. Faulkner A, Rosen S, Stanton D. Simulations of tonotopically mapped speech processors for cochlear implant electrodes varying in insertion depth. J Acoust Soc Am 2003;113:1073-80.
4. Rosen S, Faulkner A, Wilkinson L. Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 1999;106:3629-36.
5. Fu QJ, Nogaki G, Galvin JJ 3rd. Auditory training with spectrally shifted speech: implications for cochlear implant patient auditory rehabilitation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2005;6:180-9.
6. Fu QJ, Shannon RV. Effects of electrode configuration and frequency allocation on vowel recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant. Ear Hear 1999;20:332-44.
7. Gantz BJ, Turner CW. Combining acoustic and electric hearing. Laryngoscope 2003;113:1726-30.
8. Gantz BJ, Turner C, Gfeller KE. Acoustic plus electric speech processing: preliminary results of a multicenter clinical trial of the Iowa/Nucleus Hybrid implant. Audiol Neurootol 2006;11(Suppl 1):63-8.
9. Gfeller KE, Olszewski C, Turner C, Gantz B, Oleson J. Music perception with cochlear implants and residual hearing. Audiol Neurootol 2006;11(Suppl 1):12-5.
10. Turner CW, Gantz BJ, Vidal C, Behrens A. Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;115:1729-35.
11. Greenwood D. A cochlear frequency-position function for several species - 29 years later. J Acoust Soc Am 1990;87:2592-605.
12. Stakhovskaya O, Sridhar D, Bonham BM, Leake PA. Frequency map for the human cochlear spiral ganglion: implications for cochlear implants. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2007;8:220-33.
13. Turner CW, Souza PE, Forget LN. Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;97:2568-76.
14. Reiss LA, Turner CW, Erenberg SR, Gantz BJ. Changes in pitch with a cochlear implant over time. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2007;8:241-57.
15. Baskent D, Shannon RV. Frequency-place compression and expansion in cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116:3130-40.