Effects of Semantic Context and Feedback on Perceptual Learning of Speech Processed Through an Acoustic Simulation of a Cochlear Implant

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 224-234

  Loebach, Jeremy L ^a   Pisoni, David B ^a,b   Svirsky, Mario A ^c  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

acoustic simulations; cochlear implants; deafness; perceptual learning

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; LEARNING; PHONETICS; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; FEEDBACK; HUMANS; LEARNING; PHONETICS; SEMANTICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 76049100545     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0017609     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bjork R.A. Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In: Metcalfe J., and Shimamura A. (Eds). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (1994), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 185-205
2. Blamey P.J., Pyman B.C., Gordon M.G., Clark G.M., Brown A.M., Dowell R.C., and Howell R.D. Factors predicting postoperative sentence scores in postlinguistically deaf adult cochlear implant patients. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology 101 (1992) 342-348
3. Borg E. Ecological aspects of auditory rehabilitation. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 1 (2000) 234-241
4. Brown A.M., Dowell R.C., Martin L.F., and Mecklenburg D.J. Training of communication skills in implanted deaf adults. In: Clark G.M., Tong Y.C., and Patrick J.F. (Eds). Cochlear prostheses (1990), Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, United Kingdom 181-192
5. Burkholder, R. A. (2005). Perceptual learning with acoustic simulations of cochlear implants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University Bloomington.
6. Burkholder R.A., and Pisoni D.B. Speech timing and working memory in profoundly deaf children after cochlear implantation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 85 (2003) 63-88
7. Clark, G. M. (2003). Rehabilitation and habilitation. In Robert T. Beyer (Series Ed.), Cochlear implants: Fundamentals and applications (pp. 654-706). New York: Springer-Verlag.
8. Cochlear Corporation. Rehabilitation manual (1998), Author, Englewood, CO
9. Collison E.A., Munson B., and Carney A.E. Relations among linguistic and cognitive skills and spoken word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 47 (2004) 496-508
10. Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S., Hervais-Adelman A., Taylor K., and McGettigan C. Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: Evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134 (2005) 222-241
11. Dawson P., Busby P., McKay C., and Clark G. Short-term auditory memory in children using cochlear implants and its relevance to receptive language. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 45 (2002) 789-801
12. Donaldson G.S., and Nelson D.A. Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107 (2000) 1645-1658
13. Dorman M.F., and Loizou P.C. The identification of consonants and vowels by cochlear implant patients using a 6-channel CIS processor and by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of processors with two to nine channels. Ear and Hearing 19 (1998) 162-166
14. Eddington D.K., Dobelle W.H., Brackmann D.E., Mladejovsky M.G., and Parkin J.L. Auditory prostheses research with multichannel intracochlear stimulation in man. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology 87 6, Part 2 [Suppl. 53] (1978) 1-39
15. Eisner F., and McQueen J.M. The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Perception & Psychophysics 67 (2005) 224-238
16. Fishman K.E., Shannon R.V., and Slattery W.H. Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 40 (1997) 1201-1215
17. Fu Q.-J., Galvin J., Wang X., and Nogaki G. Moderate auditory training can improve speech performance of adult cochlear implant patients. Acoustic Research Letters Online 6 (2006) 106-111
18. Fu Q.-J., Nogaki G., and Galvin J.J. Auditory training with spectrally shifted speech: Implications for cochlear implant patient auditory rehabilitation. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 6 (2005) 180-189
19. Gfeller K. Aural rehabilitation of music listening for adult cochlear implant recipients: Addressing learner characteristics. Music Therapy Perspectives 19 (2001) 88-95
20. Herman R., and Pisoni D.B. Perception of "elliptical speech" following cochlear implantation: Use of broad phonetic categories in speech perception. The Volta Review 102 (2003) 321-347
21. Hervais-Adelman A., Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S., and Carlyon R.P. Perceptual learning of noise vocoded words: Effects of feedback and lexicality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 34 (2008) 460-474
22. House W.F., Berliner K.I., and Eisenberg L.S. The cochlear implant: 1980 update. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 91 (1981) 457-462
23. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements (1969), Author, New York
24. Kaiser, A. R., & Svirsky, M. A. (2000, October 15-18). Using a personal computer to perform meaningful-time signal processing in cochlear implant research. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Ninth Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Digital Signal Processing (IEEE-DSP) Workshop, Hunt, TX.
25. Kraljic T., and Samuel A.G. Generalization in perceptual learning for speech. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 13 (2006) 262-268
26. Lockhart R.S. Levels of processing, transfer-appropriate processing, and the concept of robust encoding. Memory 10 (2002) 397-403
27. Loebach J.L., and Pisoni D.B. Perceptual learning of spectrally degraded speech and environmental sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123 (2008) 1126-1139
28. Malgady R.G., and Johnson M.G. Recognition memory for literal, figurative, and anomalous sentences. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 9 (1977) 214-216
29. Marks L.E., and Miller G.A. The role of semantic and syntactic constraints in the memorization of English sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 3 (1964) 1-5
30. Martin, S. M., & Gierut, J. A. (2004, May). Sublexical effects in phonological treatment. Poster presented at the Symposium on Research in Child Language Disorders, Madison, WI.
31. McCabe, M., & Chiu, P. (2003, November 10-14). A comparison of speech recognition training programs for cochlear implant users: A simulation study. Poster session presented at the 146th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Austin, TX.
32. McConkey-Robbins A. Rehabilitation after cochlear implantation. In: Niparko J., Kirk K., Mellon N., McConkey A., Tucci D., and Wilson B. (Eds). Cochlear implants: Principles and practices (2000), Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia 323-367
33. Michelson R.P. Electrical stimulation of the human cochlea-A preliminary report. Archives of Otolaryngology 93 (1971) 317-323
34. Miller G.A., and Isard S. Some perceptual consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior 2 (1963) 217-228
35. Mirman D., McClelland J.L., and Holt L.L. An interactive Hebbian account of lexically guided tuning of speech perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 13 (2006) 958-965
36. Morris C.D., Bransford J.D., and Franks J.J. Levels of processing versus transfer-appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 16 (1977) 519-533
37. Pisoni D., Cleary M., Geers A., and Tobey E. Individual differences in effectiveness of cochlear implants in children who are prelingually deaf: New process measures of performance. The Volta Review 101 (2000) 111-164
38. Rajaram S., Srinivas K., and Roediger H. A transfer-appropriate processing account of context effects in word-fragment completion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 24 (1998) 993-1004
39. Reed C.M., and Delhorne L.A. Reception of environmental sounds through cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing 26 (2005) 48-61
40. Remez R.E., Rubin P.E., Berns S.M., Pardo J.S., and Lang J.M. On the perceptual organization of speech. Psychological Review 101 (1994) 129-156
41. Roediger H.L., Buckner R.L., and McDermott K.B. Components of processing. In: Foster J.K., and Jelicic M. (Eds). Memory: Systems, process, or function? (1999), Oxford University Press, Oxford, England
42. Shannon R.V., Zeng F.-G., Kamath V., Wygonski J., and Ekelid M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 270 (1995) 303-304
43. Stelmachowicz P.G., Hoover B.M., Lewis D.E., Kortekaas R.W.L., and Pittman A.L. The relation between stimulus context, speech audibility, and perception for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 43 (2000) 902-914
44. Sweetow R.W., and Sabes J.H. Technological advances in aural rehabilitation: Applications and innovative methods of service delivery. Trends in Amplification 11 (2007) 101-111