Effects of F1–F2 Frequency Spacing on Spectral Integration in Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to measure the effects of frequency spacing (i.e., F2 minus F1) on spectral integration for vowel perception in simulated bilateral electric–acoustic stimulation (BiEAS), electric–acoustic stimulation (EAS), and bimodal hearing. Method: Twenty listeners with typica...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research Vol. 68; no. 2; pp. 792 - 808 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Feb2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=182780500&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 182780500 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 10924388 1SM jtl: Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research issn: 10924388 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Feb2025 vid: 68 iid: 2 pid: 42 pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association artinfo: ui: 182780500 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00273 ppf: 792 ppct: 16 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 1.5MB tig: atl: Effects of F1–F2 Frequency Spacing on Spectral Integration in Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation. aug: au: Jaisinghani, Priyanka Yang-Soo Yoon affil: Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, TX. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Baylor University, Waco, TX. su: Analysis of variance Phonetics Vowels Prompts (Psychology) Research funding Hearing aids Physiological aspects of speech Electric stimulation Acoustic stimulation Speech perception sug: subj: Analysis of variance Phonetics Electromedical and Electrotherapeutic Apparatus Manufacturing Medical, Dental, and Hospital Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers All Other Health and Personal Care Stores Professional machinery, equipment and supplies merchant wholesalers Vowels Prompts (Psychology) Research funding Hearing aids Physiological aspects of speech Electric stimulation Acoustic stimulation Speech perception ab: Purpose: The aim of this study was to measure the effects of frequency spacing (i.e., F2 minus F1) on spectral integration for vowel perception in simulated bilateral electric–acoustic stimulation (BiEAS), electric–acoustic stimulation (EAS), and bimodal hearing. Method: Twenty listeners with typical hearing participated in synthetic vowel recognition. Four vowels were used with varying frequency spacings (/ͻ/: 270 Hz, /ʊ/: 653 Hz, /æ/: 1040 Hz, and /I/: 1607 Hz). F1 was acoustically simulated with a band-pass filtering, while F2 was electrically simulated using an eightchannel sine wave vocoder with matched input and output frequency range. Vowel recognition was measured in five listening conditions: BiEAS (F1 and F2 in both ears), EAS (F1 and F2 in the left ear), bimodal (F1 and F2 in opposite ears), cochlear implant alone (F2 alone in the left ear), and hearing aid alone (F1 alone in the left ear). Results: In EAS, spectral integration was significantly better at a 270-Hz spacing, while in bimodal hearing, spectral integration was significantly poorer at a 1607-Hz frequency compared to other frequency spacings. BiEAS conditions offered the best spectral integration, regardless of frequency spacing. Vowel confusion remained consistent and below chance level across the first three listening conditions. Bimodal interference occurred for the /I/ vowel when the cochlear implant ear perceives the dominant cue and the hearing aid ear perceives the nondominant cue. The F2 place cue is transmitted significantly better than the F1 height cue in BiEAS, EAS, and bimodal conditions. Conclusions: EAS and bimodal hearing integrates narrower frequency ranges better than wider spacings. EAS hearing provided greater outcomes over bimodal hearing, suggesting that within-ear (EAS) integration is more effective than across-ear (bimodal) integration. Bimodal interference may be a factor for variability in bimodal performance. Cautious interpretation and further research with real EAS and bimodal users are suggested to validate and extend these findings. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|