Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Modulation depth discrimination by cochlear implant users
View through CrossRef
Cochlear implants (CIs) convey the amplitude envelope of speech by modulating high-rate pulse-trains. However, not all of the envelope may be necessary to perceive amplitude modulations (AM); the effective envelope depth may be limited by forward and backward masking from the envelope peaks. Three experiments used modulated pulse-trains to measure which portions of the envelope can be effectively processed by CI users as a function of AM frequency. Experiment 1 used a three-interval forced-choice task to test the ability of CI users to discriminate less-modulated pulse trains from a fully-modulated standard, without controlling for loudness. The stimuli in Experiment 2 were identical, but a two-interval task was used in which participants were required to choose the less-modulated interval, ignoring loudness. Catch trials, in which judgements based on level or modulation depth would give opposing answers were included. Experiment 3 employed novel stimuli whose modulation envelope could be modified below a variable point in the dynamic range, without changing the loudness of the stimulus. Overall, results showed that substantial portions of the envelope are not accurately encoded by CI users. Experiment 1, where loudness cues were available, participants on average were insensitive to changes in the bottom 30% of their dynamic range. In Experiment 2, where loudness was controlled, participants appeared insensitive to changes in the bottom 50% of the dynamic range. In Experiment 3, participants were insensitive to changes in the bottom 80% of the dynamic range. We discuss potential reasons for this insensitivity and implications for CI speech-processing strategies.
Title: Modulation depth discrimination by cochlear implant users
Description:
Cochlear implants (CIs) convey the amplitude envelope of speech by modulating high-rate pulse-trains.
However, not all of the envelope may be necessary to perceive amplitude modulations (AM); the effective envelope depth may be limited by forward and backward masking from the envelope peaks.
Three experiments used modulated pulse-trains to measure which portions of the envelope can be effectively processed by CI users as a function of AM frequency.
Experiment 1 used a three-interval forced-choice task to test the ability of CI users to discriminate less-modulated pulse trains from a fully-modulated standard, without controlling for loudness.
The stimuli in Experiment 2 were identical, but a two-interval task was used in which participants were required to choose the less-modulated interval, ignoring loudness.
Catch trials, in which judgements based on level or modulation depth would give opposing answers were included.
Experiment 3 employed novel stimuli whose modulation envelope could be modified below a variable point in the dynamic range, without changing the loudness of the stimulus.
Overall, results showed that substantial portions of the envelope are not accurately encoded by CI users.
Experiment 1, where loudness cues were available, participants on average were insensitive to changes in the bottom 30% of their dynamic range.
In Experiment 2, where loudness was controlled, participants appeared insensitive to changes in the bottom 50% of the dynamic range.
In Experiment 3, participants were insensitive to changes in the bottom 80% of the dynamic range.
We discuss potential reasons for this insensitivity and implications for CI speech-processing strategies.
Related Results
The Effect of Cochlear Coverage on Auditory and Speech Performance in Cochlear Implant Patients
The Effect of Cochlear Coverage on Auditory and Speech Performance in Cochlear Implant Patients
Objective:
To determine the effect of cochlear coverage on audiological and speech parameters in patients with cochlear implants. Previous work has investigated the eff...
The Therapeutic Dilemma of Cochlear Nerve Deficiency: Cochlear or Brainstem Implantation?
The Therapeutic Dilemma of Cochlear Nerve Deficiency: Cochlear or Brainstem Implantation?
ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes between 2 age‐matched cohorts of children with cochlear nerve deficiency: those receiving auditory brainstem implants (group A) or cochlear implant...
Convenience and short comings among paediatric cochlear implant candidates
Convenience and short comings among paediatric cochlear implant candidates
Background: Cochlear implants have revolutionized the treatment of severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in children. However, the convenience and shortcomings experienced ...
Implant‐Abutment Interface: Biomechanical Study of Flat Top versus Conical
Implant‐Abutment Interface: Biomechanical Study of Flat Top versus Conical
ABSTRACT Background: Overloading has been identified as a primary factor behind dental implant failure. The peak bone stresses normally appear in the marginal bone. The anchorage s...
Influence of Roxolid Implant Material on The Implant Stability of Maxillary Implant Retained Overdenture
Influence of Roxolid Implant Material on The Implant Stability of Maxillary Implant Retained Overdenture
Abstract
Background
Long-term success of implant restoration depends on many factors one of them is the sufficient implant stability which is lowered in compromised bone d...
Soft tissue reconstructive techniques at implant sites
Soft tissue reconstructive techniques at implant sites
Dental implants have shown to be a reliable tool for single, multiple and full-arch rehabilitations 1. Dental implants have a very high success rate in terms of osseointegration, h...
Postoperative Predictors of Speech Reception in Cochlear Implant Users
Postoperative Predictors of Speech Reception in Cochlear Implant Users
In general, cochlear implant users see considerable benefit from their implant. Yet, there is great individual variation in speech reception. This study investigated whether indivi...
Postoperative Predictors of Speech Reception in Cochlear Implant Users
Postoperative Predictors of Speech Reception in Cochlear Implant Users
In general, cochlear implant users see considerable benefit from their implant. Yet, there is great individual variation in speech reception. This study investigated whether indivi...

