Melodic contour identification and music perception by cochlear implant users

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1169, Issue , 2009, Pages 518-533

  Galvin III, John J ^a   Fu, Qian Jie ^a   Shannon, Robert V ^a  

^a HOUSE EAR INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochlear implant; Melodic contour identification; Music perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIENCE; EXPERIMENT; HEARING; HEARING AID; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT; MUSIC; PERCEPTION; PITCH; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 68649109625     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04551.x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (39)

1. Shannon, R.V., Q.-J. Fu & J.J. Galvin. 2004. The number of spectral channels required for speech recognition depends on the difficulty of the listening situation. Acta Otolaryngol. Suppl. 552: 50-54.
2. Shannon, R.V., F.-G. Zeng, V. Kamath, et al. 1995. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 270: 303-304.
3. Smith, Z.M., B. Delgutte & A.J. Oxenham. 2002. Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature 416: 87-90.
4. Rosen, S. 1992. Temporal information in speech and its relevance for cochlear implants. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B Biol. Sci. 336: 367-373.
5. Burns, E.M. & N.F. Viemeister. 1976. Nonspectral Pitch. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 60: 863-869.
6. Burns, E.M. & N.F. Viemeister. 1981. Played-again SAM: further observations on the pitch of amplitudemodulated noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 70: 1655-1660.
7. Friesen, L.M., R.V. Shannon, D. Baskent, et al. 2001. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110: 1150-1163.
8. Fu, Q.J., S. Chinchilla, G. Nogaki, et al. 2005. Voice gender identification by cochlear implant users: the role of spectral and temporal resolution. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118: 1711-1718.
9. Padilla, M. & R.V. Shannon. 2002. Could a lack of experience with a second language be modeled as a hearing loss? [abstract] J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112: 2385.
10. Luo, X., Q.-J. Fu & J.J. Galvin. 2007. Vocal emotion recognition by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. Trends Amplif. 11: 301-315.
11. Vongphoe, M. & F.G. Zeng. 2005. Speaker recognition with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118: 1055-1061.
12. Gfeller, K., A. Christ, J.F. Knutson, et al. 2000. Musical backgrounds, listening habits, and aesthetic enjoyment of adult cochlear implant recipients. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 11: 390-406.
13. Henry, B.A., C.M. McKay, H.J. McDermott, et al. 2000. The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108: 1269-1280.
14. Nelson, D.A., D.J. Van Tasell, A.C. Schroder, et al. 1995. Electrode ranking of "place pitch" and speech recognition in electrical hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98: 1987-1999.
15. Galvin, J.J., Q.-J. Fu & G. Nogaki. 2007. Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear. 28: 302-319.
16. Kong, Y.Y., R. Cruz, J.A. Jones, et al. 2004. Music perception with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. Ear Hear. 25: 173-185.
17. Kong, Y.Y., G.S. Stickney& F.-G. Zeng. 2005. Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117: 1351-1361.
18. Galvin, J.J., Q.-J. Fu & S. Oba. 2008. Effect of instrument timbre on melodic contour identification by cochlear implant users. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124: EL189-EL195.
19. ANSI. 1960. American Standard Acoustical Terminology. American National Standards Institute. New York.
20. Poulin-Charronnat, B., E. Bigand, P. Lalitte, et al. 2004. Effects of a change in instrumentation on the recognition of musical materials. Mus. Percept. 22: 239-263.
21. Wolpert, R. 1990. Recognition of melody, harmonic accompaniment, and instrumentations:musicians vs. nonmusicians. Mus. Percept. 8: 95-106.
22. Looi, V., H.McDermott, C. McKay, et al. 2008. Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users. Ear Hear. 29: 421-434.
23. Galvin, J. J., Q.-J. Fu & S. Oba. 2009. Effect of a competing instrument on melodic contour identification by cochlear implant users. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125: EL98-EL103.
24. Stickney, G., P. Assmann, J. Chang, et al. 2007. Effects of cochlear implant processing and fundamental frequency on the intelligibility of competing sentences. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122: 1069-1078.
25. Lynch, M.P., R.E. Eilers, K.D. Oller, et al. 1991. Influences of acculturation and musical sophistication on perception of musical interval patterns. J. Exp. Psych. Hum. Percept. Perform. 17: 467-475.
26. Gfeller, K., S. Wiit, M. Adamek, et al. 2002. Effects of training on timbre recognition and appraisal by postlingually deafened cochlear implant recipients. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 13: 132-145.
27. Fu, Q.-J., J.J. Galvin, III, X. Wang, et al. 2005. Moderate auditory training can improve speech performance of adult cochlear implant users. Acoust. Res. Lett. Online 6: 106-111.
28. Spivak, L.G. & S.B. Waltzman. 1990. Performance of cochlear implant patients as a function of time. J. Speech Hear. Res. 33: 511-519.
29. Loeb, G.E. & D.K. Kessler. 1995. Speech recognition performance over timewith the Clarion cochlear prosthesis. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. Suppl. 166: 290-292.
30. Nicholas, J.G. & A.E. Geers. 2007. Will they catch up? The role of age at cochlear implantation in the spoken language development of children with severe to profound hearing loss. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 50: 1048-1062.
31. Eggermont, J.J. & C.W. Ponton. 2003. Auditoryevoked potential studies of cortical maturation in normal hearing and implanted children: correlations with changes in structure and speech perception. Acta. Otolaryngol. 123: 249-252.
32. Svirsky, M.A., A.M. Robbins, K.I. Kirk, et al. 2000. Language development in profoundly deaf children with cochlear implants. Psychol. Sci. 11: 153-158.
33. Robbins K.M., D.B. Koch, M.J. Osberger, et al. 2004. The effect of age at cochlear implantation on auditory skill development in infants and toddlers. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 130: 570-574.
34. Manrique, M., F.J. Cevera-Paz, A. Huarte, et al. 2004. Advantages of cochlear implantation in prelingual deaf children before 2 years of age when compared to later implantation. Laryngoscope 114: 1462-1469.
35. Mitani, C., T. Nakata, S.E. Trehub, et al. 2007. Music recognition, music listening, and word recognition by deaf children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 28(Suppl): S29-33.
36. Koch, D.B., M. Downing, M.J. Osberger, et al. 2007. Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users. Ear Hear. 28(Suppl): S38-41.
37. Bierer, J.A. 2007. Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121: 1642-1653.
38. Litvak, L.M., A.J. Spahr& G. Emadi. 2007. Loudness growth observed under partially tripolar stimulation: model and data from cochlear implant listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122: 967-981.
39. Middlebrooks, J.C. & R.L. Snyder. 2007. Auditory prosthesis with a penetrating nerve array. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 8: 258-279.