The role of spectral and temporal cues in voice gender discrimination by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users

JARO - Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 253-260

  Fu, Qian Jie ^a   Chinchilla, Sherol ^a   Galvin, John J ^a  

^a HOUSE EAR INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochlear implants; Spectral cues; Temporal cues; Voice gender

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GENDER; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; TASK PERFORMANCE; VOICE;

ADULT; AGED; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PITCH PERCEPTION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOICE;

EID: 4944224135     PISSN: 15253961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10162-004-4046-1     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ARNDT P, STALLER S, ARCAROLI J, HINES A, EBINGER K. Within-subject comparison of advanced coding strategies in the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant. Cochlear Corporation, Englewood, CO, 1999.
2. BRILL S, GSTOTTNER W, HELMS J, ILBERG CV, BAUMGARTNER W, MULLER J, KIEFER J. Optimization of channel number and stimulation rate for the fast CIS strategy in the COMBI 40+. Am. J. Otol. 18:S104-S106, 1997.
3. CLEARY M, PISONI DB. Talker discrimination by prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants: preliminary results. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. Suppl. 189:113-118, 2002.
4. DORMAN M, LOIZOU P, RAINEY D. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band output. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102:2403-2411, 1997.
5. DORMAN MF, LOIZOU PC, FITZKE J. 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. 104:3583-3585, 1998.
6. DRULLMAN R, FESTEN JM, PLOMP R. Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception. J. coust. Soc. Am. 95:1053-1064, 1994.
7. FELLOWES JM, REMEZ RE, RUBIN PE. Perceiving sex and identity of a talker without natural voice timbre. Percept. Psycophys. 59(6):839-849, 1997.
8. FRIESEN LM, SHANNON RV, BASKENT D, WANG X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: a comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:1150-1163, 2001.
9. FRIESEN LM, SHANNON RV, CRUZ R. Speech recognition as a function of stimulation rate in Clarion and Nucleus-22 cochlear implants. Audiol. Neurootol. 2004, in press.
10. FU Q-J, SHANNON RV. Effects of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition in cochlear implant users. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107:589-597, 2000.
11. FU Q-J, ZENG F-G. Effects of envelope cues on Mandarin Chinese tone recognition. Asia Pac. J. Speech Lang. Hear. 5(1):45-57, 2000.
12. FU Q-J, SHANNON R, WANG X. Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: Acoustic and electric hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104:3586-3596, 1998a.
13. FU Q-J, ZENG F-G, SHANNON RV, SOLI SD. Importance of tonal envelope cues in Chinese speech recognition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104:505-510, 1998b.
14. FU Q-J, HSU C-J, HORNG M-J. Effects of speech processing strategy on Chinese tone recognition by nucleus-24 cochlear implant patients. Ear Hear. 2004, in press.
15. GREENWOOD DD. A cochlear frequency-position function for several species - 29 Years later. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87:2592-2605, 1990.
16. HILLENBRAND J, GETTY LA, CLARK MJ, WHEELER K. Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97:3099-3111, 1998.
17. KLATT DH, KLATT LC. Analysis, synthesis and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80:820-857, 1990.
18. LADEFOGED P. A Course In Phonetics. 3rd ed. Harcourt Brace College Publishers, City, p 187, 1993.
19. LINKE CE. A study of pitch characteristics of female voices and their relationship to vocal effectiveness. Folia Phoniatr. (Basel). 25(3):173-185, 1973.
20. LOIZOU P, POROY O, DORMAN M. The effect of parametric variations of cochlear implant processors on speech understanding. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108:790-802, 2000.
21. LOIZOU P, POROY O. Minimal spectral contrast needed for vowel identification by normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:1619-1627, 2001.
22. LUO X, FU Q-J. Enhancing Chinese tone recognition by manipulating amplitude contour: Implications for cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2004, in press.
23. MCDONALD CJ, KIRK KI, KRUEGER T, HOUSTON D, SPRUNGER A. Talker Discrimination by Adults with Cochlear Implants. Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 26th Midwinter Meeting, February 2003.
24. MURY T, SIGH S. Multidimensional analysis of male and female voices. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68:1294-1300, 1980.
25. REMEZ RE, FELLOWES JM, RUBIN PE. Talker identification based on phonetic information. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 23:651-666, 1997.
26. ROSEN S. Temporal information in speech: acoustic, auditory and linguistic aspects. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 336:367-373, 1992.
27. SELIGMAN PM, MCDENNOTT HJ. Architecture of the Spectra-22 speech processor. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 104(Suppl. 166):139-141, 1995.
28. SHANNON RV, ZENG FG, KAMMATH V, WYGONSKI J, EKELID M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science. 270:303-304, 1995.
29. SHEFFERT SM, PISONI DB, FELLOWES JM, REMEZ RE. Learning to recognize talkers from natural, sinewave, and reversed speech samples. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 28:1447-1469, 2002.
30. SPAHR A, DORMAN MF, KIRK KI. A comparison of performance among patients fit with the CII Hi-resolution, 3G and TEMP+ processors. 2003 Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, p 161, 2003.
31. TITZE IR. Some technical considerations in voice perturbation measurements. J. Speech Hear Res. 30(2):252-260, 1987.
32. TITZE IR. Physiologic and acoustic differences between male and female voices. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85(4):1699-1707, 1989.
33. VAN TASELL DJ, GREENFIELD DG, LOGEMANN JJ, NELSON DA. Temporal cues for consonant recognition: Training, talker generalization, and use in evaluation of cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 92:1247-1257, 1992.
34. WHITESIDE SP. Identification of a speaker's sex: a study of vowels. Percept. Mot. Skills. 86(2):579-584, 1998.
35. WILSON B, LAWSON D, ZERBI M, WOLFORD R. Speech Processors for Auditory Prostheses. NIH Project N01-DC-8-2105, Third Quarterly Progress Report, 1999.