Work

Word Recognition Variability With Cochlear Implants

Year: 2015

Type: article

Abstract: In Brief Objectives: Cochlear implantation does not automatically result in robust spoken language understanding for postlingually deafened adults. Enormous outcome variability exists, related to the complexity of understanding spoken language through cochlear implants (CIs), which deliver degraded speech representations. This investigation examined variability in word recognition as explained by “perceptual attention” and “auditory sensitivity” to acoustic cues underlying speech perception. Design: Thirty postlingually deafened adults with CIs and 20 age-matched controls with normal hearing (NH) were tested. Participants underwent assessment of word recognition in quiet and perceptual attention (cue-weighting strategies) based on labeling tasks for two phonemic contrasts: (1) “cop”–“cob,” based on a duration cue (easily accessible through CIs) or a dynamic spectral cue (less accessible through CIs), and (2) “sa”–“sha,” based on static or dynamic spectral cues (both potentially poorly accessible through CIs). Participants were also assessed for auditory sensitivity to the speech cues underlying those labeling decisions. Results: Word recognition varied widely among CI users (20 to 96%), but it was generally poorer than for NH participants. Implant users and NH controls showed similar perceptual attention and auditory sensitivity to the duration cue, while CI users showed poorer attention and sensitivity to all spectral cues. Both attention and sensitivity to spectral cues predicted variability in word recognition. Conclusions: For CI users, both perceptual attention and auditory sensitivity are important in word recognition. Efforts should be made to better represent spectral cues through implants, while also facilitating attention to these cues through auditory training. Enormous outcome variability exists for adults with cochlear implants (CIs). This study examined “perceptual attention” and “auditory sensitivity” to acoustic cues as sources of variability. Adults with CIs and controls with normal hearing (NH) performed three tasks: (1) Word recognition in quiet; (2) Labeling for stimuli varying along temporal or spectral dimensions; and (3) Discrimination of nonspeech analogs. Attention to spectral cues, beyond sensitivity, predicted variability in word recognition for CI listeners; neither attention nor sensitivity to temporal cues did. Thus, efforts are needed to improve spectral representations through implants and to facilitate attention to these cues through auditory training.

Source: Ear and Hearing

DOI: 10.1097/aud.0000000000000204

Authors: Aaron C. Moberly, Joanna H. Lowenstein, Susan Nittrouer

Institutions: The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, University of Florida, The Ohio State University

Language: English

Topic: Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation

Subfield: Cognitive Neuroscience

Field: Neuroscience

Domain: Life Sciences

SDG: Good health and well-being

Open Access status: green