scholarly journals Contribution of formant frequency information to vowel perception in steady-state noise by cochlear implant users

2017 ◽  
Vol 141 (2) ◽  
pp. 1027-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elad Sagi ◽  
Mario A. Svirsky
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Formant Frequency ◽  
Vowel Perception ◽  
Frequency Information

Vowel Perception

1986 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen J. Doyle ◽  
Jeffrey L. Danhauer ◽  
Bradly J. Edgerton
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Vowel Identification ◽  
Vowel Perception ◽  
Percent Correct ◽  
Frequency Information ◽  
Vowel Recognition ◽  
Second Formant

We investigated vowel perception by 15 subjects using the single-electrode cochlear implant used at the House Ear Institute in Los Angeles. Subjects were postlingually deaf adults having histories of unsuccessful hearing aid use and a minimum of 6 to 12 months experience with the implant. Eleven American English vowels spoken by a male talker were tape recorded, digitized, analyzed, and controlled for the experiments. The stimuli were audiorecordings of both natural and loudness-matched vowels. Subjects rated the dissimilarity of both the naturally spoken and the loudness-matched vowels, and performed identification of the latter. Two normal-hearing subjects served as controls for the dissimilarity tasks. Multidimensional scaling, hierarchical clustering, and percent correct identification analyses were used to help determine the perceptual features used by the subjects in their judgments. Generally, the normal-hearing subjects took advantage of second formant (F2) frequency information. The cochlear-implant users relied primarily upon fundamental (F0) and first formant (F1) frequency information and demonstrated difficulty in vowel identification. No major differences were noted for the natural versus loudness-matched vowels. F2 information, requisite for accurate vowel recognition, did not correspond to any of the perceptual dimensions discerned in the results obtained from implant subjects.

Auditory steady-state response in cochlear implant patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 268-274
Author(s):  
Alejandro Torres-Fortuny ◽  
Isabel Arnaiz-Marquez ◽  
Heivet Hernández-Pérez ◽  
Eduardo Eimil-Suárez
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Steady State Response ◽  
State Response ◽  
Auditory Steady State Response

scholarly journals Characterization of cochlear implant artifacts in electrically evoked auditory steady-state responses

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 127-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne Deprez ◽  
Robin Gransier ◽  
Michael Hofmann ◽  
Astrid van Wieringen ◽  
Jan Wouters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Steady State Responses ◽  
Auditory Steady State Responses ◽  
State Responses

Our experience of recording the auditory steady-state responses in the patients using cochlear implant system

2019 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-63
Author(s):  
I. V. Naumova ◽  
◽  
A. V. Pashkov ◽  
S. V. Gadaleva ◽  
D. S. Klyаchko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Steady State Responses ◽  
Auditory Steady State Responses ◽  
Implant System ◽  
State Responses

Cochlear implant channels with high thresholds degrade medial vowel perception.

2011 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 2656-2656
Author(s):  
Julie Arenberg Bierer ◽  
Steven M. Bierer ◽  
Erin S. Maloff ◽  
Ann Lin
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Vowel Perception
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document