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.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Contour identification with pitch and loudness cues using cochlear implants
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), 745–753.
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), 34–41.
3. Dowling, W. J. , and Fujitani, D. S. (1970). “ Contour, interval, and pitch recognition in memory for melodies,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49(2), 524–531.
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), 412–423.
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), 3659–3667.
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, 1050–1059.
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), 160–168.
Article metrics loading...
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.
Full text loading...
Most read this month