1887
banner image
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.
oa
Contour identification with pitch and loudness cues using cochlear implants
Rent:
Rent this article for
Access full text Article
/content/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/10.1121/1.4832915
1.
1. Allen, J. B. , Hall, J. L. , and Jeng, P. (1990). “ Loudness growth in 1/2-octave bands (LGOB)—A procedure for the assessment of loudness,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88(2), 745753.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.399778
2.
2. Cousineau, M. , Demany, L. , Meyer, B. , and Pressnitzer, D. (2010). “ What breaks a melody: Perceiving F0 and intensity sequences with a cochlear implant,” Hear Res. 269(1–2), 3441.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2010.07.007
3.
3. Dowling, W. J. , and Fujitani, D. S. (1970). “ Contour, interval, and pitch recognition in memory for melodies,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49(2), 524531.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1912382
4.
4. Galvin, J. J. , Fu, Q.-J. , and Nogaki, G. (2007). “ Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners,” Ear Hear. 28(3), 302319.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000261689.35445.20
5.
5. Gfeller, K. , Turner, C. , Oleson, J. , Zhang, X. Y. , Gantz, B. , Froman, R. , and Olszewski, C. (2007). “ Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients on pitch perception, melody recognition, and speech reception in noise,” Ear Hear. 28(3), 412423.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e3180479318
6.
6. Luo, X. , and Fu, Q.-J. (2004). “ Enhancing Chinese tone recognition by manipulating amplitude envelope: Implications for cochlear implants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116(6), 36593667.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1783352
7.
7. McDermott, J. H. , Lehr, A. J. , and Oxenham, A. J. (2008), “ Is relative pitch specific to pitch?Psychol. Sci. 19(12), 12631271.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02235.x
8.
8. Neuhoff, J. G. , McBeath, M. K. , and Wanzie, W. C. (1999), “ Dynamic frequency change influences loudness perception: A central, analytic process,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 25, 10501059.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.25.4.1050
9.
9. Singh, S. , Kong, Y.-Y. , and Zeng, F.-G. (2009). “ Cochlear implant melody recognition as a function of melody frequency range, harmonicity, and number of electrodes,” Ear Hear. 30(2), 160168.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31819342b9
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/10.1121/1.4832915
Loading

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.

Click to view

FIG. 1.

Loudness growth as a function of noise intensity level (a) for NH listeners and CI users and (b) for Advanced Bionics and Cochlear CI users. Symbols show the mean intensity level in dB SPL, and error bars show the standard deviation across subjects for the corresponding loudness rating. For clarity of illustration, error bars are shown in only one direction.

Image of FIG. 2.

Click to view

FIG. 2.

(a) Mean contour identification for different cue conditions, and (b) as a function of root note, (c) semitone spacing, and (d) intensity range with either pitch cues alone, loudness cues alone, or consistent pitch and loudness cues. The white boxes show NH performance and the gray boxes show CI performance. The lines within the boxes show the median and the box boundaries show the 75th and 25th percentiles. The error bars show the 90th and 10th percentiles and the dots show outliers. The dashed horizontal lines indicate chance performance level (11.11% correct).

Tables

Generic image for table

Click to view

TABLE I.

CI subject demographics.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/10.1121/1.4832915
2013-12-10
2014-04-17

Abstract

Different from speech, pitch and loudness cues may or may not co-vary in music. Cochlear implant (CI) users with poor pitch perception may use loudness contour cues more than normal-hearing (NH) listeners. Contour identification was tested in CI users and NH listeners; the five-note contours contained either pitch cues alone, loudness cues alone, or both. Results showed that NH listeners' contour identification was better with pitch cues than with loudness cues; CI users performed similarly with either cues. When pitch and loudness cues were co-varied, CI performance significantly improved, suggesting that CI users were able to integrate the two cues.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/1.4832915.html;jsessionid=lvel65wxn1rt.x-aip-live-02?itemId=/content/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/10.1121/1.4832915&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah&containerItemId=content/asa/journal/jasa
true
true
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Contour identification with pitch and loudness cues using cochlear implants
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/135/1/10.1121/1.4832915
10.1121/1.4832915
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM