Information From the Voice Fundamental Frequency (F0) Region Accounts for the Majority of the Benefit When Acoustic Stimulation Is Added to Electric Stimulation

Zhang, Ting; Dorman, Michael F.; Spahr, Anthony J.

doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e3181b7190c

Cited by 160 publications

(234 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

208

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The top performer, CI-2, had a number of advantages, including professional knowledge of hearing and assistive technologies as well as residual low-frequency hearing (at 250 and 500 Hz) in his unimplanted ear, which was selectively amplified. Zhang, Dorman, and Spahr (2010) have documented the contribution of low-frequency acoustic hearing to the recognition of monosyllabic words.…”

Section: Open-set Word Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Kalathottukaren

Purdy

Ballard

2015

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implants (CIs) provide coarse representations of pitch, which are adequate for speech but not for music. Despite increasing interest in music processing by CI users, the available information is fragmentary. The present experiment attempted to fill this void by conducting a comprehensive assessment of music processing in adult CI users. CI users (n =6) and normally hearing (NH) controls (n = 12) were tested on several tasks involving melody and rhythm perception, recognition of familiar music, and emotion of recognition in speech and music. CI performance was substantially poorer than NH performance and at chance levels on pitch processing tasks. Performance was highly variable, however, with one individual achieving NH performance levels on some tasks, probably because of low-frequency residual hearing in his unimplanted ear. Future research with a larger sample of CI users can shed light on factors associated with good and poor music processing in this population.iii

show abstract

Section: Open-set Word Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Kalathottukaren

Purdy

Ballard

2015

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Referred to variably as electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) or bimodal hearing, this configuration involves the use of residual low-frequency acoustic hearing in the ear either ipsilateral or contralateral to the CI (Gifford et al, 2010). The improvements to intelligibility in noise with this strategy are well-documented (e.g., von Ilberg et al, 1999;Gantz and Turner, 2004;Gantz et al, 2005;Kong et al, 2005;Gifford et al, 2007;Dorman et al, 2008;Brown and Bacon, 2009a;Zhang et al, 2010). Dorman et al (2008) reported that, in a babble background at a S/N of þ5 dB, CI users' sentence recognition improved by an average of 22 percentage points with the addition of contralateral acoustic stimulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening

Tillery¹,

Brown²,

Bacon³

2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implant users report difficulty understanding speech in both noisy and reverberant environments. Electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) is known to improve speech intelligibility in noise. However, little is known about the potential benefits of EAS in reverberation, or about how such benefits relate to those observed in noise. The present study used EAS simulations to examine these questions. Sentences were convolved with impulse responses from a model of a room whose estimated reverberation times were varied from 0 to 1 sec. These reverberated stimuli were then vocoded to simulate electric stimulation, or presented as a combination of vocoder plus low-pass filtered speech to simulate EAS. Monaural sentence recognition scores were measured in two conditions: reverberated speech and speech in a reverberated noise. The long-term spectrum and amplitude modulations of the noise were equated to the reverberant energy, allowing a comparison of the effects of the interferer (speech vs noise). Results indicate that, at least in simulation, (1) EAS provides significant benefit in reverberation; (2) the benefits of EAS in reverberation may be underestimated by those in a comparable noise; and (3) the EAS benefit in reverberation likely arises from partially preserved cues in this background accessible via the low-frequency acoustic component.

show abstract

“…and (b) Do low-frequency information and high-frequency information play different roles for CI and bimodal listeners in terms of bandwidth extension to improve their perception of telephone speech? It should be noted that a few other studies assessed the effect of limiting the information accessible to bimodal users by either low passing the acoustic stimuli (Zhang et al, 2010b), or high passing the electric stimuli and low passing the acoustic stimuli (Zhang, Dorman, & Spahr, 2010a). They showed that the F0 was the beneficial cue for the bimodal benefits in speech recognition in noise by electroacoustic stimulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies (see, e.g., Dorman, Gifford, Spahr, & McKarns, 2008;Gantz, Turner, & Gfeller, 2006;Hu & Loizou, 2010;Kiefer et al, 2005;Kong, Stickney, & Zeng, 2005;Turner, Gantz, Vidal, Behrens, & Henry, 2004;von Ilberg et al, 1999) have documented the improved speech intelligibility, especially in noise, when low-frequency acoustic sound is added to the electrical information presented by the CI. These benefits were at least partly attributed to a better representation of F0 cues from the lowfrequency acoustic energy (see, e.g., Chang, Bai, & Zeng, 2006;Hu, 2010;Qin & Oxenham, 2006;Zhang, Dorman, & Spahr, 2010b). The presence of variation in the F0 has been shown to be a useful cue for bimodal listeners for identifying word boundaries, thereby facilitating lexical segmentation (Spitzer, Liss, Spahr, Dorman, & Lansford, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Perception of Telephone-Processed Speech by Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation

Tahmina

Runge-Samuelson

et al. 2013

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assesses the effects of adding low-or high-frequency information to the band-limited telephone-processed speech on bimodal listeners' telephone speech perception in quiet environments. In the proposed experiments, bimodal users were presented under quiet listening conditions with wideband speech (WB), bandpass-filtered telephone speech (300-3,400 Hz, BP), high-pass filtered speech (f > 300 Hz, HP, i.e., distorted frequency components above 3,400 Hz in telephone speech were restored), and low-pass filtered speech (f < 3,400 Hz, LP, i.e., distorted frequency components below 300 Hz in telephone speech were restored). Results indicated that in quiet environments, for all four types of stimuli, listening with both hearing aid (HA) and cochlear implant (CI) was significantly better than listening with CI alone. For both bimodal and CI-alone modes, there were no statistically significant differences between the LP and BP scores and between the WB and HP scores. However, the HP scores were significantly better than the BP scores. In quiet conditions, both CI alone and bimodal listening achieved the largest benefits when telephone speech was augmented with high rather than low-frequency information. These findings provide support for the design of algorithms that would extend higher frequency information, at least in quiet environments.Keywords cochlear implant, bimodal hearing, bandwidth effect, electroacoustic stimulation, telephone speech For technological and economic reasons (e.g., to save the bandwidth of communication channels), the public telephone network only passes spectral information between 300 Hz and 3400 Hz. Thus, in telephone speech, lowfrequency information below 300 Hz and high-frequency information above 3400 Hz is mostly severely distorted. This bandwidth was selected according to the study on speech intelligibility by French and Steinberg (1947) for normal-hearing listeners. The band limiting poses only negligible challenges for listeners with normal hearing; however, the reduced spectral information can have negative impact on speech intelligibility for listeners with cochlear implants (CIs). Several previous studies (see, e.g., Cohen, Waltzman, & Shapiro, 1989;Cray et al., 2004;Fu & Galvin, 2006;Horng, Chen, Hsu, & Fu, 2007;Ito, Nakatake, & Fujita, 1999;Milchard & Cullington, 2004) evaluating conventional CI listeners' telephone usage have demonstrated that their recognition of telephone speech is significantly worse than their recognition of wideband speech, and it has been generally established that the reduced bandwidth of the telephone speech accounts for a significant amount of performance deterioration. These studies support the hypothesis that techniques to extend the bandwidth for telephone speech can potentially improve CI listeners' telephone speech perception. So far, only a few studies have examined bandwidth extension techniques for improving CI users' perception of telephone speech. For listeners who wear conventional CI devices, a recent study by Liu, Fu, and Nar...

show abstract

Information From the Voice Fundamental Frequency (F0) Region Accounts for the Majority of the Benefit When Acoustic Stimulation Is Added to Electric Stimulation

Cited by 160 publications

References 35 publications

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening

The Perception of Telephone-Processed Speech by Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About