Better fitting of cochlear implants: Modeling loudness for acoustic and electric stimuli

Journal of Neural Engineering

Volumn 6, Issue 6, 2009, Pages

  McDermott, Hugh ^a   Varsavsky, Andrea ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC HEARING; COCHLEAR IMPLANT; COMPUTATIONAL MODEL; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; ELECTRIC STIMULI; FITTING TECHNIQUES; FREQUENCY CONTENTS; NUMERICAL MODELS; PSYCHOPHYSICAL; SIMULTANEOUS USE;

ACOUSTICS; DIGITAL FILTERS; ELECTROTHERAPEUTICS; HEARING AIDS;

ACOUSTIC SIGNAL PROCESSING;

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; ELECTROSTIMULATION; HEARING AID; LOUDNESS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOUND LEVEL METER; ALGORITHM; HEARING; HEARING DISORDER; HUMAN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESIS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REPRODUCIBILITY; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ALGORITHMS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; HEARING AIDS; HEARING DISORDERS; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROSTHESIS FITTING; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 72849114018     PISSN: 17412560     EISSN: 17412552     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/6/6/065007     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Blamey P J, Dooley G J, James C J and Parisi E S 2000 Monaural and binaural loudness measures in cochlear implant users with contralateral residual hearing Ear. Hear. 21 6-17
2. Ching T Y 2005 The evidence calls for making binaural-bimodal fittings routine Hear. J. 58 32-41
3. Ching T Y, Incerti P and Hill M 2004 Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears Ear. Hear. 25 9-21
4. Dillon H 2001 Hearing Aids (Sydney: Boomerang Press)
5. Dorman M F, Gifford R H, Spahr A J and McKarns S A 2008 The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies Audiol. Neurootol. 13 105-12
6. Gantz B J and Turner C 2004 Combining acoustic and electrical speech processing: Iowa/Nucleus hybrid implant Acta Otolaryngol. 124 344-7 (Pubitemid 38797581)
7. Glasberg B R and Moore B C J 1990 Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data Hear. Res. 47 103-138
8. Helms J, Weichbold V, Baumann U, von Specht H, Schon F, Muller J, Esser B, Zieze M, Anderson I and D'Haese P 2004 Analysis of ceiling effects occurring with speech recognition tests in adult cochlear-implanted patients J. Otorhinolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 66 130-5
9. Launer S and Moore B C J 2003 Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. V. On-line gain control in a digital hearing aid Int. J. Audiol. 42 262-73
10. McDermott H and Sucher C 2007 Speech processing for cochlear implants and bimodal stimulation Proc. Joint 8th EFAS Congress/10th Congress of German Society of Audiology (Heidelberg, 6-9 June 2007)
11. McDermott H J, McKay C M, Richardson L M and Henshall K R 2003 Application of loudness models to sound processing for cochlear implants J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114 2190-7
12. McKay C M and McDermott H J 1998 Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: the effect of interpulse intervals J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104 1061-74
13. McKay C M, Henshall K R, Farrell R J and McDermott H J 2003 A practical method of predicting the loudness of complex electrical stimuli J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113 2054-63
14. McKay C M, McDermott H J and Clark G M 1995 Loudness summation for two channels of stimulation in cochlear implants: effects of spatial and temporal separation Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. Suppl. 166 230-3
15. Moore B C and Glasberg B R 2004 A revised model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss Hear. Res. 188 70-88
16. Moore B C J and Glasberg B R 1996 A revision of Zwicker's loudness model Acta Acust. Acust. 82 335-45
17. Moore B C J and Glasberg B R 1997 A model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss Aud. Neurosci. 3 289-311
18. Robinson J D, Baer T and Moore B C J 2007 Using transposition to improve consonant discrimination and detection for listeners with severe high-frequency hearing loss Int. J. Audiol. 46 293-308
19. Simpson A, Hersbach A A and McDermott H J 2005 Improvements in speech perception with an experimental nonlinear frequency compression hearing device Int. J. Audiol. 44 281-92
20. Skinner M 2003 Optimizing cochlear implant speech performance Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 112 4-13
21. Skinner M and Demorest M 1999 Comparison of two methods for selecting minimum stimulation levels used in programming the Nucleus 22 cochlear implant J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 42 814-28