Lexical Tone Perception with HiResolution and HiResolution 120 Sound-Processing Strategies in Pediatric Mandarin-Speaking Cochlear Implant Users

Abstract

Objectives-Lexical tone recognition tends to be poor in cochlear implant users. The HiResolution (HiRes) sound-processing strategy is designed to better preserve temporal fine structure, or the detailed envelope information, of an acoustic signal. The newer HiRes 120 strategy builds on HiRes by increasing the amount of potential spectral information delivered to the implant user. The purpose of this study was to examine lexical tone recognition in native Mandarin Chinese-speaking children with cochlear implants using the HiRes and HiRes 120 sound-processing strategies. Tone recognition performance was tested with HiRes at baseline and then after up to 6 mo of HiRes 120 experience in the same subjects.Design-Twenty prelingually deafened, native Mandarin-speaking children, with ages ranging from 3.5 to 16.5 yr, participated. All children completed a computerized tone contrast test on three occasions: (1) using HiRes immediately before conversion to HiRes 120 (baseline), (2) 1 mo after conversion, and (3) 3 mo after conversion. Twelve of the 20 children also were tested 6 mo after conversion. In addition, the parents of 18 children completed a questionnaire at the 3-mo follow-up visit regarding the preference of sound-processing strategies and the children's experience related to various aspects of auditory perception and speech production using HiRes 120.Results-As a group, no statistically significant differences were seen between the tone recognition scores using HiRes and HiRes 120. Individual scores showed great variability. Tone recognition performance ranged from chance (50% correct) to nearly perfect. Using the conventional HiRes strategy, 6 of the 20 children achieved high-level tone recognition performance (i.e., ≥90% correct), whereas 7 performed at a level not significantly different from chance (50-60% correct). At the final test, either 3 or 6 mo after conversion, all children achieved tone recognition performance with HiRes 120 that was equal to or better than that with HiRes, although some children's tone recognition performance was worse initially at the 1 or 3 mo follow-up intervals than at baseline. Eight of the 20 children showed statistically significant improvement in tone recognition performance with HiRes 120 on at least one of the follow-up tests. Age at implantation was correlated with tone recognition performance at all four test intervals. Parents of most of the children indicated that the children preferred HiRes 120 more than HiRes.Conclusions-As a group, HiRes 120 did not provide significantly improved lexical tone recognition compared to HiRes, at least throughout the length of the study (up to 6 mo). There were

Relative Contributions of Temporal Envelope and Fine Structure Cues to Lexical Tone Recognition in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

“…Therefore, transmitting more fine structure through cochlear implants to users might be an effective approach to improving pitch perception for them (e.g., Nie et al 2005). So far, however, little evidence has shown that any of the fine-structure strategies would make a dramatic improvement for lexical tone perception or music perception in cochlear implant users (e.g., Riss et al 2008Riss et al , 2009Han et al 2009;Firszt et al 2009;Schatzer et al 2010). Many studies have shown that cochlear implant users could only detect differences in pitch for frequencies up to about 300 Hz (e.g., Shannon 1983; Zeng 2002), which is much poorer than that observed in normal-hearing listeners (Carlyon and Deeks 2002).…”

“…Contemporary cochlear implant technology has provided unfavorable lexical tone perception for tone language speakers (e.g., Xu et al 2002Wei et al 2004;Xu and Pfingst 2008;Zhou et al 2008;Han et al 2009;Wang et al 2011; see Xu and Zhou 2011 for a review). Previous studies based on the measurement of normal-hearing listeners have demonstrated that fine structure is more critical for pitch perception than temporal envelope (e.g., Smith et al 2002;Xu and Pfingst 2003;Kong and Zeng 2006).…”

Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening

“…Ongoing efforts to increase fine structure via the creation of "virtual" electrodes (e.g., McDermott and McKay, 1994;Geurts and Wouters, 2004;Firszt et al, 2007;Berenstein et al, 2008;Landsberger and Srinivasan, 2009) or the provision of fine temporal detail (e.g., Rubinstein et al, 1999;Arnoldner et al, 2007;Riss et al, 2009) have met with limited success. In general, results show some improvement in pitch detection or discrimination, but limited gains to speech reception in noise (Berenstein et al, 2008;Firszt et al, 2009;Han et al, 2009;Riss et al, 2009;Shannon et al, 2011).…”

Percepção da fala de usuários de implante coclear com a estratégia HiRes 120: revisão sistemática

“…Of the nine fully revised studies, three were taken off the systematic review -one for testing a version of the HiRes 120 1 strategy research version called SpecRes and two other studies were taken off because of the methodological design presented 2,3 , that is, studies which made a speech perception longitudinal assessment in CI users after conversion from the HiRes to HiRes 120 strategy; nonetheless, they did not have a control group and did not reassess the auditory performance of the participants with the HiRes strategy after using the HiRes 120. This made unfeasible the maintenance of these systematic review studies, since their results could have been influenced by the learning effect, in other words, performance improvement did not happen thanks to the strategy change, but rather by the entire auditory perception, based on a greater auditory experience with the CI.…”