ABSTRACT
Previous research has shown that normal hearing listeners can identify vowels in syllables on the basis of either quasi-static or dynamic spectral cues; however, it is not known how well cochlear implant (CI) users with current-generation devices can make use of these cues. The present study assessed vowel identification in adult CI users and a comparison group of young normal hearing (YNH) listeners. Stimuli were naturally spoken /dVd/ syllables and modified syllables that retained only quasi-static spectral cues from an 80-ms segment of the vowel center ("C80" stimuli) or dynamic spectral cues from two 20-ms segments of the vowel edges ("E20" stimuli). YNH listeners exhibited near-perfect performance for the unmodified (99.8%) and C80 (92.9%) stimuli and maintained good performance for the E20 stimuli (70.2%). CI users exhibited poorer average performance than YNH listeners for the Full stimuli (72.3%) and proportionally larger reductions in performance for the C80 stimuli (41.8%) and E20 stimuli (29.0%). Findings suggest that CI users have difficulty identifying vowels on the basis of spectral cues in the absence of duration cues, and have limited access to brief dynamic spectral cues. Error analyses suggest that CI users may rely strongly on vowel duration cues when those cues are available.
Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation/instrumentation , Cochlear Implants , Correction of Hearing Impairment/instrumentation , Cues , Persons With Hearing Impairments/rehabilitation , Recognition, Psychology , Speech Acoustics , Speech Perception , Voice Quality , Acoustic Stimulation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Audiometry, Pure-Tone , Audiometry, Speech , Auditory Threshold , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Persons With Hearing Impairments/psychology , Prosthesis Design , Sound Spectrography , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
Test results and management data are summarized for 260 patients with diagnoses of Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder (ANSD). Hearing aids were tried in 85 of these patients, and 49 patients tried cochlear implants. Approximately 15% reported some benefit from hearing aids for language learning, while improvement in speech comprehension and language acquisition was reported in 85% of patients who were implanted. Approximately 5% (13/260) of the total population developed normal speech and language without intervention. Patients were diagnosed at our laboratory (n=66) or referred from other sites (n=194), and all showed absent/grossly abnormal auditory brainstem responses (ABR), often 'ringing' cochlear microphonics, and the presence or history of otoacoustic emissions. Etiologies and co-existing conditions included genetic (n=41), peripheral neuropathies (n=20), perinatal jaundice and/or anoxia and/or prematurity (n=74). These patients comprise 10% or more of hearing impaired patients; their language acquisition trajectories are generally unpredictable from their audiograms.
