Full text loading...
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Recognition of spectrally degraded and frequency-shifted vowels in acoustic and electric hearing
1.ANSI (1969). ANSI S3.5-1969. “American National Standard Methods for the Calculation of the Articulation Index” (American National Standards Institute, New York).
2.Beasley, D. S. , Mosher, N. L. , and Orchik, D. J. (1976). “Use of frequency-shifted/time-compressed speech with hearing impaired children,” Audiology 15, 395–406.
3.Boothroyd, A. , Mulhearn, B. , Gong, J. , and Ostroff, J. (1996). “Effects of spectral smearing on phoneme and word recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100, 1807–1818.
4.Daniloff, R. G. , Shiner, T. H. , and Zemlin, W. R. (1968). “Intelligibility of vowels altered in duration and frequency,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 44, 700–707.
5.Dorman, M. F. , Dankowski, K. , McCandless, G. , and Smith, L. M. (1989). “Consonant recognition as a function of the number of channels of stimulation by patients who use the Symbion cochlear implant,” Ear Hearing 10, 288–291.
6.Dorman, M. F. , Loizou, P. C. , and Rainey, D. (1997a). “Speech understanding as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2403–2411.
7.Dorman, M. F. , Loizou, P. C. , and Rainey, D. (1997b). “Simulating the effect of cochlear-implant electrode insertion-depth on speech understanding,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2993–2996.
8.Dubno, J. R. , and Dorman, M. F. (1987). “Effects of spectral flattening on vowel identification,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82, 1503–1511.
9.Dubno, J. R. , and Schaefer, A. B. (1995). “Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 1165–1174.
10.Dudley, H. (1939). The Vocoder, Bell Labs Record 17, pp. 122–126.
11.Fishman, K. , Shannon, R. V. , and Slattery, W. H. (1997). “Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 40, 1201–1215.
12.Fu, Q.-J. (1997). “Speech perception in acoustic and electric hearing,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California—Los Angeles.
13.Fu, Q.-J. , and Shannon, R. V. (1998). “Effects of amplitude nonlinearity on speech recognition by cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 2570–2577.
14.Greenwood, D. D. (1990). “A cochlear frequency-position function for several species—29 years later,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 2592–2605.
15.Hill, F. J. , McRae, L. P. , and McClellan, R. P. (1968). “Speech recognition as a function of channel capacity in a discrete set of channels,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 44, 13–18.
16.Hillenbrand, J. , Getty, L. , Clark, M. , and Wheeler, K. (1994). “Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 3099–3111.
17.McDermott, H. J. , McKay, C. M. , and Vandali, A. E. (1992). “A new portable sound processor for the University of Melbourne/Nucleus Limited Multichannel cochlear implant,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 3367–3371.
18.Nagafuchi, M. (1976). “Intelligibility of distorted speech sounds shifted in frequency and time in normal children,” Audiology 15, 326–337.
19.Posen, M. P. , Reed, C. M. , and Braida, L. D. (1993). “Intelligibility of frequency-lowered speech produced by a channel vocoder,” J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 30, 26–38.
20.Rabinowitz, W. M. , and Eddington, D. (1995). “Effects of Channel-to-Electrode Mappings on Speech Reception with the Ineraid Cochlear Implant,” Ear Hear. 16, 450–458.
21.Rosen, S., Faulkner, A., and Wilkinson, L. (1997). “Perceptual adaptation by normal listeners to upward shifts of spectral information in speech and its relevance for users of cochlear implants,” in Speech, Hearing, and Language: Work in Progress (Phonetics and Linguistics, University College, London), Vol. 10.
22.Shannon, R. V. (1992). “Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 1974–1982.
23.Shannon, R. V. (1993). “Psychophysics of electrical stimulation,” in Cochlear Implants: Audiological Foundations, edited by R. S. Tyler (Singular, San Diego), pp. 357–388.
24.Shannon, R. V. , Adams, D. D. , Ferrel, R. L. , Palumbo, R. L. , and Grantgenett, M. (1990). “A computer interface for psychophysical and speech research with the Nucleus cochlear implant,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 905–907.
25.Shannon, R. V. , Zeng, F-G. , Kamath, V. , Wygonski, J. , and Ekelid, M. (1995). “Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues,” Science 270, 303–304.
26.Shriner, T. H. , Beasley, D. S. , and Zemlin, W. R. (1969). “The effects of frequency division on speech identification in children,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 12, 402–412.
27.ter Keurs, M. , Festen, J. M. , and Plomp, R. (1992). “Effect of spectral envelope smearing on speech reception. I,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 2872–2880.
28.ter Keurs, M. , Festen, J. M. , and Plomp, R. (1993). “Effect of spectral envelope smearing on speech reception. II,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93, 1547–1552.
29.Thomas, I. B. (1968). “The influence of first and second formants on the intelligibility of clipped speech,” J. Audio. Eng. Soc. 16, 182–185.
30.Tiffany, W. R. , and Bennett, D. A. (1961). “Intelligibility of slow-played speech,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 4, 248–258.
31.Villchur, E. (1977). “Electronic models to simulate the effect of sensory distortions on speech perception by the deaf,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 62, 665–674.
32.Wallace, W. , and Koury, G. (1981). “Transfer effects from listening to frequency-controlled and frequency-shifted accelerated speech,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 24, 185–191.
33.Wilson, B. S. , Finley, C. C. , Lawson, D. T. , Wolford, R. D. , Eddington, D. K. , and Rabinowitz, W. M. (1991). “New levels of speech recognition with cochlear implants,” Nature (London) 352, 236–238.
34.Zollner, V. M. (1979). “Intelligibility of the Speech of a Simple Vocoder,” Acustica 43, 271–272.
Article metrics loading...