Influence of bilateral cochlear implants on vocal control

Kirchner, Abbigail; Loucks, Torrey M.; Abbs, Elizabeth; Shi, Kevin; Yu, Jeff W.; Aronoff, Justin M.

doi:10.1121/10.0001099

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is not clear whether CI users can incorporate auditory feedback with feedforward plans to monitor their speech output. A recent study 70 showed that CIs might help their user to refine their internal motor commands, but voice pitch monitoring might not happen regularly. The main message of the current study is that a high auditory sensitivity does not guarantee a successful error correction in an ongoing vocalization.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one’s own voice pitch sensitivity

Alemi

Lehmann

Deroche

2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring voice pitch is a fine-tuned process in daily conversations as conveying accurately the linguistic and affective cues in a given utterance depends on the precise control of phonation and intonation. This monitoring is thought to depend on whether the error is treated as self-generated or externally-generated, resulting in either a correction or inflation of errors. The present study reports on two separate paradigms of adaptation to altered feedback to explore whether participants could behave in a more cohesive manner once the error is of comparable size perceptually. The vocal behavior of normal-hearing and fluent speakers was recorded in response to a personalized size of pitch shift versus a non-specific size, one semitone. The personalized size of shift was determined based on the just-noticeable difference in fundamental frequency (F0) of each participant’s voice. Here we show that both tasks successfully demonstrated opposing responses to a constant and predictable F0 perturbation (on from the production onset) but these effects barely carried over once the feedback was back to normal, depicting a pattern that bears some resemblance to compensatory responses. Experiencing a F0 shift that is perceived as self-generated (because it was precisely just-noticeable) is not enough to force speakers to behave more consistently and more homogeneously in an opposing manner. On the contrary, our results suggest that the type of the response as well as the magnitude of the response do not depend in any trivial way on the sensitivity of participants to their own voice pitch. Based on this finding, we speculate that error correction could possibly occur even with a bionic ear, typically even when F0 cues are too subtle for cochlear implant users to detect accurately.

show abstract

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one’s own voice pitch sensitivity

Alemi

Lehmann

Deroche

2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The detrimental effect of using CIs on voice quality is different than what has been seen for fundamental frequency and intensity control. Kirchner et al 8 measured bilateral CI users’ ability to maintain a stable fundamental frequency when producing a sustained vowel while either using or not using their CIs. Unlike with voice quality, they did not find a significant shift in fundamental frequency control when the CI was on versus off.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the impact of CIs on various aspects of vocal production in CI users remains unclear. For instance, although there is evidence that access to auditory feedback through CIs could improve vocal pitch control 5 , 6 , such effects are not consistent across studies (e.g., 7 , 8 ). To date, it has been difficult to predict a consistent pattern of vocal characteristics for CI users (e.g., 7 , 9 , 10 ), and the prevalence of voice disorders within CI users is unknown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One additional concern regarding CI users’ voices is that bilateral CI use can detrimentally affect voice control compared to unilateral CI use 8 , 26 . This could stem from incongruent acoustic feedback between the ears 27 – 29 or from the fusion of various pitches into one auditory perception when both ears are engaged 30 , which lowers spectral resolution and may further degrade the encoded harmonic structure in the auditory feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of cochlear implants use on voice production and quality

Guastamacchia,

Albera,

Puglisi

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implant users experience difficulties controlling their vocalizations compared to normal hearing peers. However, less is known about their voice quality. The primary aim of the present study was to determine if cochlear implant users’ voice quality would be categorized as dysphonic by the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS). A secondary aim was to determine if vocal quality is further impacted when using bilateral implants compared to using only one implant. The final aim was to determine how residual hearing impacts voice quality. Twenty-seven cochlear implant users participated in the present study and were recorded while sustaining a vowel and while reading a standardized passage. These recordings were analyzed to calculate the AVQI and CPPS. The results indicate that CI users’ voice quality was detrimentally affected by using their CI, raising to the level of a dysphonic voice. Specifically, when using their CI, mean AVQI scores were 4.0 and mean CPPS values were 11.4 dB, which indicates dysphonia. There were no significant differences in voice quality when comparing participants with bilateral implants to those with one implant. Finally, for participants with residual hearing, as hearing thresholds worsened, the likelihood of a dysphonic voice decreased.

show abstract

“…There were a total of eight stimuli, each consisting of a vocalization of /a/ collected in a previous study ( Kirchner et al , 2020 ). Multiple vocalizations, recorded from different speakers, were used in a random order to help participants maintain attention.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using unilateral stimulation to create a reference for bilateral fusion judgments

Kim

Aronoff

2021

JASA Express Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring binaural fusion can be challenging, especially with bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users. This study validated a technique of using unilateral stimulation to create a reference for measuring fusion. Seven bilateral CI users listened to stimuli randomly presented to the right, left, or both ears. Participants indicated the size, number, and location of the resulting image(s) they perceived. The participants had largely unitary, punctate percepts that were lateralized to the stimulated ear for unilateral stimuli. The image was centered but more diffuse when the stimuli were presented bilaterally. The results suggest unilateral stimuli can provide a reference for binaural fusion.

show abstract

Influence of bilateral cochlear implants on vocal control

Cited by 6 publications

References 41 publications

Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one’s own voice pitch sensitivity

Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one’s own voice pitch sensitivity

Impact of cochlear implants use on voice production and quality

Using unilateral stimulation to create a reference for bilateral fusion judgments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About