The recognition of phonemes in consonant-vowel-consonant words, presented in speech-shaped random noise, was measured as a function of signal to noise ratio (S/N) in 10 normally hearing adults and 10 successful adult users of the Nucleus cochlear implant. Optimal scores (measured at a S/N of +25 dB) were 98% for the average normal subject and 42% for the average implantee. Phoneme recognition threshold was defined as the S/N at which the phoneme recognition score fell to 50% of its optimal value. This threshold was -2 dB for the average normal subject and +9 dB for the average implantee. Application of a digital noise suppression algorithm (IN-TEL) to the mixed speech plus noise signal had no effect on the optimal phoneme recognition score of either group or on the phoneme recognition threshold of the normal group. It did, however, improve the phoneme recognition threshold of the implant group by an average of 4 to 5 dB. These findings illustrate the noise susceptibility of Nucleus cochlear implant users and suggest that singlechannel digital noise reduction techniques may offer some relief from this problem. (Ear Hear 13 4263-271)

Two experiments were carried out to determine how manipulating the compression ratio and release time of a single-band wide dynamic range hearing aid affects sound quality. In experiment I, compression ratio was varied over the range from linear to 10:1 (low compression threshold, attack time = 5 ms, release time = 200 ms). In experiment II, compression ratios of 1.5, 2, and 3:1 were combined with release times of 60, 200, and 1000 ms (attack time = 5 ms). Twenty listeners with sensorineural hearing loss rated the clarity, pleasantness, background noise, loudness, and the overall impression of speech-in-noise (Ventilation, Apartment, Cafeteria) processed through a compression hearing aid. Results revealed that increasing compression ratio caused decreases in ratings on all scales. Increasing release time caused ratings of pleasantness to increase, and ratings of background noise and loudness to decrease. At the 3:1 compression ratio, increasing the release time caused increases in ratings of clarity, pleasantness, and overall impression, and a decrease in background noise. Significant correlations were found between scales. Regression analysis revealed that the contributions of the scales of clarity, pleasantness, background noise, and loudness to the prediction of overall impression differed as a function of the competing noise condition.

The speech of a postlingually deafened preadolescent was recorded and analyzed while a single-electrode cochlear implant (3M/House) was in operation, on two occasions after it failed (1 day and 18 days) and on three occasions after stimulation of a multichannel cochlear implant (Nucleus 22) (1 day, 6 months, and 1 year). Listeners judged 3M/House tokens to be the most normal until the subject had one year's experience with the Nucleus device. Spectrograms showed less aspiration, better formant definition and longer final frication and closure duration post-Nucleus stimulation (6 MO. NUCLEUS and 1 YEAR NUCLEUS) relative to the 3M/House and no auditory feedback conditions. Acoustic measurements after loss of auditory feedback (1 DAY FAIL and 18 DAYS FAIL) indicated a constriction of vowel space. Appropriately higher fundamental frequency for stressed than unstressed syllables, an expansion of vowel space and improvement in some aspects of production of voicing, manner and place of articulation were noted one year post-Nucleus stimulation. Loss of auditory feedback results are related to the literature on the effects of postlingual deafness on speech. Nucleus and 3M/House effects on speech are discussed in terms of speech production studies of single-electrode and multichannel patients.

The decision to provide a child with a cochlear implant is quite complex, as it must include consideration not only of the implant itself but also of the habilitative services necessary following the surgical procedure. To provide a systematic means of selecting hearing-impaired children for cochlear implants, a team at Children's Hearing Institute, Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, developed the Children's Implant Profile (ChIP). There is no one profile of a successful implant user—at least 11 factors appear to contribute to successful implantation. In the ChIP, each factor is evaluated on a three-point scale: (1) no concern, (2) mild-to-moderate concern, and (3) great concern. A profile showing "no concern" on all 11 factors denotes clear acceptability of the child as an implant candidate. A profile including several ratings in the "mild-to-moderate concern" category suggests a need for further study to determine if improvements could be made in projected outcomes before initiating surgical procedures. Finally, ratings of "great concern," especially on more than one factor, indicate a very limited probability of successful implant outcomes, at least at the time of evaluation. A case study is presented to demonstrate the relationship between the evaluated factors and to show how the profile is used to address and remedy areas of concern.