Effects of stimulus duration on amplitude modulation processing with cochlear implants

Luo, Xin; Galvin, John J.; Fu, Qian-Jie

doi:10.1121/1.3280236

Cited by 24 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A range of studies on amplitude modulation detection in CI users reported the effects of stimulation rate (Galvin & Fu 2005, 2009Pfingst et al 2007;McKay & Henshall 2010;Arora et al 2011), stimulation site (Pfingst et al 2007;Garadat et al 2012), stimulation mode (Galvin & Fu 2005;Pfingst 2011), stimulus duration (Luo et al 2010), stimulus level (Galvin & Fu 2005, 2009Pfingst et al 2007), and loudness growth (McKay & Henshall 2010) on AMDTs. In most of these studies, the electrical stimulus was presented directly to one or more electrodes using computer-controlled stimulation, bypassing the clinical sound processor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prelingually deafened CI users were less sensitive to temporal modulations than postlingually deafened CI users, and the attenuation rate of their TMTF was steeper. For all CI users, subjects with better amplitude modulation detection skills tended to score better on measures of speech understanding. Significant correlations with low modulation frequencies were found only for the prelingually deafened CI users and not for the postlingually deafened CI users.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With single electrodes and direct electric stimulation, a wide range of temporal modulation detection studies have been conducted including the evaluation of temporal modulation transfer functions (TMTFs) (e.g., Shannon, 1992;Busby et al, 1993), the determination of effects of stimulation rate, mode, level (Galvin and Fu, 2005), site (Pfingst et al, 2007(Pfingst et al, , 2008, loudness growth (Galvin and Fu, 2009), envelope masking (Chatterjee and Oba, 2004), and stimulus duration (Luo et al, 2010) on modulation detection thresholds (MDTs), the analysis of the relationship between amplitude modulation detection and intensity discrimination (Donaldson and Viemeister, 2000), and the effect of amplitude modulation on loudness perception (McKay and Henshall, 2010). This approach provides useful information about what electrical amplitude modulation CI users are capable of hearing, and suggest ways future technologies might make best use of these abilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners

Won

Drennan

Nie

et al. 2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

101

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goals of the present study were to measure acoustic temporal modulation transfer functions (TMTFs) in cochlear implant listeners and examine the relationship between modulation detection and speech recognition abilities. The effects of automatic gain control, presentation level and number of channels on modulation detection thresholds (MDTs) were examined using the listeners' clinical sound processor. The general form of the TMTF was low-pass, consistent with previous studies. The operation of automatic gain control had no effect on MDTs when the stimuli were presented at 65 dBA. MDTs were not dependent on the presentation levels (ranging from 50 to 75 dBA) nor on the number of channels. Significant correlations were found between MDTs and speech recognition scores. The rates of decay of the TMTFs were predictive of speech recognition abilities. Spectral-ripple discrimination was evaluated to examine the relationship between temporal and spectral envelope sensitivities. No correlations were found between the two measures, and 56% of the variance in speech recognition was predicted jointly by the two tasks. The present study suggests that temporal modulation detection measured with the sound processor can serve as a useful measure of the ability of clinical sound processing strategies to deliver clinically pertinent temporal information.

show abstract

“…At that level, the function had a steep roll-off at high AM rates (>200 Hz). At low AM rates, there was also a worsening of performance, perhaps owing to limited stimulus duration [i.e., not as many cycles of AM at low rates as at high rates within the 300 ms duration: see Luo et al (2010)]. This worsening of performance at low rates generally is not observed in AMD tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing

Chatterjee

Oberzut

2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments were designed to examine temporal envelope processing by cochlear implant (CI) listeners. In experiment 1, the hypothesis that listeners' modulation sensitivity would in part determine their ability to discriminate between temporal modulation rates was examined. Temporal modulation transfer functions (TMTFs) obtained in an amplitude modulation detection (AMD) task were compared to threshold functions obtained in an amplitude modulation rate discrimination (AMRD) task. Statistically significant nonlinear correlations were observed between the two measures. In experiment 2, results of loudness-balancing showed small increases in the loudness of modulated over unmodulated stimuli beyond a modulation depth of 16%. Results of experiment 3 indicated small but statistically significant effects of level-roving on the overall gain of the TMTF, but no impact of level-roving on the average shape of the TMTF across subjects. This suggested that level-roving simply increased the task difficulty for most listeners, but did not indicate increased use of intensity cues under more challenging conditions. Data obtained with one subject, however, suggested that the most sensitive listeners may derive some benefit from intensity cues in these tasks. Overall, results indicated that intensity cues did not play an important role in temporal envelope processing by the average CI listener.

show abstract

Effects of stimulus duration on amplitude modulation processing with cochlear implants

Cited by 24 publications

References 17 publications

Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users

Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users

Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners

Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About