Perception of speech in reverberant conditions using AM-FM cochlear implant simulation

Hearing Research

Volumn 269, Issue 1-2, 2010, Pages 162-168

  Drgas, Szymon ^a,b   Blaszak, Magdalena A ^a,c  

^a ADAM MICKIEWICZ UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

^b POZNAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COGNITION; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FREQUENCY MODULATOR; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REACTION TIME; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; WORD RECOGNITION;

ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; DEAFNESS; ELECTRIC STIMULATION THERAPY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY, BRAIN STEM; FEMALE; GUINEA PIGS; MODELS, ANIMAL; REACTION TIME; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPIRAL GANGLION;

EID: 77956338421     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.06.016     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Apoux F., Crouzet O., Lorenzi C. Temporal envelope expansion of speech in noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: effects on identification performance and response times. Hear. Res. 2001, 153:123-131.
2. Bolt R.H., MacDonald A.D. Theory of speech masking by reverberation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1949, 21(6):577-580.
3. Carroll J., Zeng F.G. Fundamental frequency discrimination and speech perception in noise in cochlear implant simulations. Hear. Res. 2007, 231(1-2):42-53.
4. Chen H., Zeng F.G. Frequency modulation detection in cochlear implant subjects. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2004, 116:2269-2277.
5. Culling J.F., Hodder K.I., Toh C.Y. Effects of reverberation on perceptual segregation of competing voices. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2003, 114(5):2871-2876.
6. Deary I.J., Der G., Ford G. Reaction times and intelligence differences: a population-based cohort study. Intelligence 2001, 29(5):389-399.
7. Delogu C., Conte S., Sementina C. Cognitive factors in the evaluation of synthetic speech. Speech Commun. 1998, 24:153-168.
8. Drgas, S., Błaszak, M.A. Perceptual consequences of change in vocoded speech parameters for various reverberation condition. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 52, 945-955.
9. Friesen L.M., Shannon R.V., Baskent D., Wang X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2001, 110:1150-1163.
10. Gatehouse S., Gordon J. Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. Br. J. Audiol. 1990, 24:63-68.
11. Hecker M.H.L., Stevens K.N., et al. Measurements of reaction time in intelligibility tests. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1966, 39(6):1188-1189.
12. Huisman W.H.T., Attenborough K. Reverberation and attenuation in a pine forest. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1991, 90(5):2664-2677.
13. Irwin R.J., McAuley S.F. Relations among temporal acuity, hearing loss, and the perception of speech distorted by noise and reverberation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1987, 81:1557-1565.
14. Acoustics - Measurement of the reverberation time of rooms with reference to other acoustical parameters 1997, ISO 3382, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
15. Koch D.B., Osberger M.J., Segel P., Kessler D. HiResolution and conventional sound processing in the HiResolution bionic ear: using appropriate outcome measures to assess speech recognition ability. Audiol. Neuro. Otol. 2004, 9(4):214-223.
16. Lochner J.P.A., Burger J.F. The intelligibility of speech under reverberant conditions. Acustica 1961, 7:195-200.
17. Moore B.C.J., Füllgrabe C., Sek A. Estimation of the center frequency of the highest modulation filter. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2009, 125:1075-1081.
18. Nabelek A.K., Robinson P.K. Monaural and binaural speech perception in reverberation for listeners of various age. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1982, 71:1242-1248.
19. Nie K.B., Stickney G.S., Zeng F.-G. Encoding frequency modulation to improve cochlear implant performance in noise. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2005, 52(1):64-73.
20. Nilsson E., Hellstrom B., Berthelsen B. Room acoustical measures for open plan spaces. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2008, 123:2971.
21. Plomp R. Binaural and monaural speech intelligibility of connected discourse in reverberation as a function of azimuth of a single competing sound source (speech or noise). Acustica 1976, 34:200-211.
22. Poissant S.F., Whitmal N.A., Freyman R.L. Effects of reverberation and masking on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2006, 119:1606-1615.
23. Qin M.K., Oxenham A.J. Effects of simulated cochlear implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2003, 114:446-454.
24. Ralston J.V., Pisoni D.B., Lively S.E., Greene B.G., Mullennix J.W. Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: word monitoring and sentence-by-sentence listening times. Hum. Factor 1981, 33(4):471-491.
25. Sayles M., Schouten B., Ingham N.J., Winter I.M. The effect of reverberation on the temporal representation of the F0 of frequency-swept harmonic complexes in the ventral cochlear nucleus. Hearing - From Sensory Processing to Perception 2007.
26. Sevensson C., Nilsson E. Optimum Room Acoustic Comfort™ (RAC™) can be achieved by using a selection of appropriate acoustic descriptors. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2008, 123:3498.
27. Shannon R.V. Detection of gaps in sinusoids and pulse trains by patients with cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1989, 85:2587-2592.
28. Shannon R.V. Quantitative comparison of electrically and acoustically evoked auditory perception: implications for the location of perceptual mechanisms. Prog. Brain Res. 1993, 97:261-269.
29. Skinner M.W., Arndt P.L., Staller S.J. Nucleus® 24 advanced encoder conversion study: performance versus preference. Ear Hear. 2002, 23:2S-17S.
30. Stickney G.S., Nie K., Zeng F.-G. Contribution of frequency modulation to speech recognition in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2005, 118(4):2412-2420.
31. Studebaker G.A. A " Rationalized" arcsine transform. J. Speech Hearing Res. 1985, 28:455-462.
32. Watkins A.J., Holt N.J. Effects of a complex reflection on vowel identification. Acust. Acta Acust. 2000, 86:532-542.
33. Zeng F.-G., Nie K., Stickney G.S., Kong Y.-Y., Vongphoe M., Bhargave A., Wei C., Cao K. Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modulations. PNAS 2005, 102(7):2293-2298.