Sound localization in noise in hearing‐impaired listeners

1997 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 3104-3105
Author(s):  
Christian Lorenzi ◽  
Stuart Gatehouse ◽  
Catherine Lever
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lasse Embøl ◽  
Carl Hutters ◽  
Andreas Junker ◽  
Daniel Reipur ◽  
Ali Adjorlu ◽  
...  

Cochlear implants (CI) enable hearing in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss, albeit with difficulties in speech perception and sound localization. In noisy environments, these difficulties are disproportionately greater for CI users than for children with no reported hearing loss. Parents of children with CIs are motivated to experience what CIs sound like, but options to do so are limited. This study proposes using virtual reality to simulate having CIs in a school setting with two contrasting settings: a noisy playground and a quiet classroom. To investigate differences between hearing conditions, an evaluation utilized a between-subjects design with 15 parents (10 female, 5 male; age M = 38.5, SD = 6.6) of children with CIs with no reported hearing loss. In the virtual environment, a word recognition and sound localization test using an open-set speech corpus compared differences between simulated unilateral CI, simulated bilateral CI, and normal hearing conditions in both settings. Results of both tests indicate that noise influences word recognition more than it influences sound localization, but ultimately affects both. Furthermore, bilateral CIs are equally to or significantly beneficial over having a simulated unilateral CI in both tests. A follow-up qualitative evaluation showed that the simulation enabled users to achieve a better understanding of what it means to be an hearing impaired child.


1999 ◽  
Vol 105 (6) ◽  
pp. 3454-3463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Lorenzi ◽  
Stuart Gatehouse ◽  
Catherine Lever

1995 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 3346-3347
Author(s):  
Brad Rakerd ◽  
Timothy J. Vander Velde ◽  
William Morris Hartmann

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 3770
Author(s):  
Mark D. Fletcher ◽  
Jana Zgheib ◽  
Samuel W. Perry

Cochlear implants (CIs) recover hearing in severely to profoundly hearing-impaired people by electrically stimulating the cochlea. While they are extremely effective, spatial hearing is typically severely limited. Recent studies have shown that haptic stimulation can supplement the electrical CI signal (electro-haptic stimulation) and substantially improve sound localization. In haptic sound-localization studies, the signal is extracted from the audio received by behind-the-ear devices and delivered to each wrist. Localization is achieved using tactile intensity differences (TIDs) across the wrists, which match sound intensity differences across the ears (a key sound localization cue). The current study established sensitivity to across-limb TIDs at three candidate locations for a wearable haptic device, namely: the lower tricep and the palmar and dorsal wrist. At all locations, TID sensitivity was similar to the sensitivity to across-ear intensity differences for normal-hearing listeners. This suggests that greater haptic sound-localization accuracy than previously shown can be achieved. The dynamic range was also measured and far exceeded that available through electrical CI stimulation for all of the locations, suggesting that haptic stimulation could provide additional sound-intensity information. These results indicate that an effective haptic aid could be deployed for any of the candidate locations, and could offer a low-cost, non-invasive means of improving outcomes for hearing-impaired listeners.


1978 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Nodar

The teachers of 2231 elementary school children were asked to identify those with known or suspected hearing problems. Following screening, the data were compared. Teachers identified 5% of the children as hearing-impaired, while screening identified only 3%. There was agreement between the two procedures on 1%. Subsequent to the teacher interviews, rescreening and tympanometry were conducted. These procedures indicated that teacher screening and tympanometry were in agreement on 2% of the total sample or 50% of the hearing-loss group. It was concluded that teachers could supplement audiometry, particularly when otoscopy and typanometry are not available.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document