Speech Perception in Individuals With Auditory Neuropathy
Contact author: Fan-Gang Zeng, 364 Med Surge II, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697. Email: fzeng{at}uci.edu PURPOSE: Speech perception in participants with auditory neuropathy (AN) was systematically studied to answer the following 2 questions: Does noise present a particular problem for people with AN? Can clear speech and cochlear implants alleviate this problem? METHOD: The researchers evaluated the advantage in intelligibility of clear speech over conversational speech in 13 participants with AN. Of these participants, 7 had received a cochlear implant. Eight sentence-recognition experiments were conducted to examine the clear speech advantage in 2 listening conditions (quiet and noise) using 4 stimulation modes (monaural acoustic, diotic acoustic, monaural electric, and binaurally combined acoustic and electric stimulation). RESULTS: Participants with AN performed more poorly in speech recognition in noise than did the normal-hearing, cochlear-impaired, and cochlear implant controls. A significant clear speech advantage was observed, ranging from 9 to 23 percentage points in intelligibility for all listening conditions and stimulation modes. Electric stimulation via a cochlear implant produced significantly higher intelligibility than acoustic stimulation in both quiet and in noise. Binaural hearing with either diotic acoustic stimulation or combined acoustic and electric stimulation produced significantly higher intelligibility than monaural stimulation in quiet but not in noise. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with AN most likely derive the clear speech advantage from enhanced temporal properties in clear speech and improved neural synchrony with electric stimulation. Although the present result supports cochlear implantation as one treatment choice for people with AN, it suggests that the use of innovative hearing aids may be another viable option to improve speech perception in noise. KEY WORDS: auditory neuropathy, binaural hearing, clear speech, cochlear implant, speech perception CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Facebook Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?.
| Medienart: |
Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2006 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2006 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:49 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of speech, language, and hearing research - 49(2006), 2, Seite 367-380 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Zeng, Fan-Gang [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
Volltext |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1044/1092-4388(2006/029) |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
OLC1984066919 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC1984066919 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230714222939.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 161202s2006 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1044/1092-4388(2006/029) |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a PQ20170206 |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC1984066919 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)GBVOLC1984066919 | ||
| 035 | |a (PRQ)14571-51751c2c279159ce26d4baaa5a48836fc7f6a3320affc5a32682ffd4ebd56bd50 | ||
| 035 | |a (KEY)0012001420060000049000200367speechperceptioninindividualswithauditoryneuropath | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 400 |a 610 |a 150 |q DE-600 |
| 084 | |a LING |2 fid | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Zeng, Fan-Gang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Speech Perception in Individuals With Auditory Neuropathy |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2006 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Contact author: Fan-Gang Zeng, 364 Med Surge II, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697. Email: fzeng{at}uci.edu PURPOSE: Speech perception in participants with auditory neuropathy (AN) was systematically studied to answer the following 2 questions: Does noise present a particular problem for people with AN? Can clear speech and cochlear implants alleviate this problem? METHOD: The researchers evaluated the advantage in intelligibility of clear speech over conversational speech in 13 participants with AN. Of these participants, 7 had received a cochlear implant. Eight sentence-recognition experiments were conducted to examine the clear speech advantage in 2 listening conditions (quiet and noise) using 4 stimulation modes (monaural acoustic, diotic acoustic, monaural electric, and binaurally combined acoustic and electric stimulation). RESULTS: Participants with AN performed more poorly in speech recognition in noise than did the normal-hearing, cochlear-impaired, and cochlear implant controls. A significant clear speech advantage was observed, ranging from 9 to 23 percentage points in intelligibility for all listening conditions and stimulation modes. Electric stimulation via a cochlear implant produced significantly higher intelligibility than acoustic stimulation in both quiet and in noise. Binaural hearing with either diotic acoustic stimulation or combined acoustic and electric stimulation produced significantly higher intelligibility than monaural stimulation in quiet but not in noise. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with AN most likely derive the clear speech advantage from enhanced temporal properties in clear speech and improved neural synchrony with electric stimulation. Although the present result supports cochlear implantation as one treatment choice for people with AN, it suggests that the use of innovative hearing aids may be another viable option to improve speech perception in noise. KEY WORDS: auditory neuropathy, binaural hearing, clear speech, cochlear implant, speech perception CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Facebook Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this? | ||
| 540 | |a Nutzungsrecht: © COPYRIGHT 2006 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural: etiology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Humans | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Speech Intelligibility | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Acoustic Stimulation: methods | |
| 650 | 4 | |a National Library of Medicine | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Dichotic Listening Tests | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases: complications | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Speech Perception: physiology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Electric Stimulation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cochlear Implants | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cochlear Nerve: physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Multivariate Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural: physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases: physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Noise: adverse effects | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Case-Control Studies | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Task Performance and Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases: rehabilitation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Male | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural: rehabilitation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Female | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Noise - adverse effects | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases - physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases - complications | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cochlear Nerve - physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - physiopathology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Speech Perception - physiology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases - rehabilitation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - etiology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - rehabilitation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Acoustic Stimulation - methods | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Care and treatment | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing impaired | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Speech perception | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Noise | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Audiology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Voice recognition | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cochlear implants | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hearing impairment | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Speech | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Liu, Sheng |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of speech, language, and hearing research |d Rockville, Md. : American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 1997 |g 49(2006), 2, Seite 367-380 |w (DE-627)225688409 |w (DE-600)1364086-0 |w (DE-576)058273263 |x 1092-4388 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:49 |g year:2006 |g number:2 |g pages:367-380 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/029) |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u http://jslhr.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/49/2/367 |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16671850 |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u http://search.proquest.com/docview/232335877 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a FID-LING | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHY | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-DE-84 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2002 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4082 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4116 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4193 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4219 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4310 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 49 |j 2006 |e 2 |h 367-380 | ||