JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Speech and Hearing Research Vol.32 93-111 March 1989.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, S.
Right arrow Articles by Edgerton, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, S.
Right arrow Articles by Edgerton, B. J.

Prosodic and Segmental Aspects of Speech Perception with the House/3M Single-Channel Implant

Stuart Rosen 1
John Walliker 1
Judith A. Brimacombe 2

Bradly J. Edgerton 3

1 University College London
2 Cochlear Corporation, Englewood, CO
3 Medicorp Diagnostic Centers, Los Angeles

Four adult users of the House/3M single-channel cochlear implant were tested for their ability to label question and statement intonation contours (by auditory means alone) and to identify a set of 12 intervocalic consonants (with and without lipreading). Nineteen of 20 scores obtained on the question/statement task were significantly better than chance. Simplifying the stimulating waveform so as to signal fundamental frequency alone sometimes led to an improvement in performance. In consonant identification, lipreading alone scores were always far inferior to those obtained by lipreading with the implant. Phonetic feature analyses showed that the major effect of using the implant was to increase the transmission of voicing information, although improvements in the appropriate labelling of manner distinctions were also found. Place of articulation was poorly identified from the auditory signal alone. These results are best explained by supposing that subjects can use the relatively gross temporal information found in the stimulating waveforms (periodicity, randomness and silence) in a linguistic fashion. Amplitude envelope cues are of significant, but secondary, importance. By providing information that is relatively invisible, the House/3M device can thus serve as an important aid to lipreading, even though it relies primarily on the temporal structure of the stimulating waveform. All implant systems, including multi-channel ones, might benefit from the appropriate exploitation of such temporal features.

Submitted on July 9, 1987
Accepted on May 17, 1988







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1989 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.