From the Journals: CI Users Recognize Speech Better Than Gender People with cochlear implants generally do not distinguish between male and female voices as well as they recognize speech, according to the results of a study in the October 2013 issue of the Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research (on.asha.org/gender-categorization). This disconnect between CI users’ speech recognition recovery ... From the Journals
Free
From the Journals  |   January 01, 2014
From the Journals: CI Users Recognize Speech Better Than Gender
Author Notes
Article Information
Hearing & Speech Perception / Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants & Assistive Technology / From the Journals
From the Journals   |   January 01, 2014
From the Journals: CI Users Recognize Speech Better Than Gender
The ASHA Leader, January 2014, Vol. 19, 40. doi:10.1044/leader.FTJ3.19012014.40
The ASHA Leader, January 2014, Vol. 19, 40. doi:10.1044/leader.FTJ3.19012014.40
CI Users Recognize Speech Better Than Gender
People with cochlear implants generally do not distinguish between male and female voices as well as they recognize speech, according to the results of a study in the October 2013 issue of the Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research (on.asha.org/gender-categorization). This disconnect between CI users’ speech recognition recovery and voice feature perception may be related to spectral and temporal degradation caused by CI sound coding, or to central voice processing deficits.
The authors—led by Pascal Barone at the Université Paul Sabatier, France—presented a continuum of voice samples to 42 single-sided CI users (20 male, 22 female) age 20–80, and 14 people with normal hearing (seven male, seven female; mean age 25). The continuum included nine acoustic steps between a typical male and a typical female voice.
The results showed a global—though variable—deficit for voice gender categorization in CI recipients compared with normal-hearing participants. This deficit was stronger in cases of ambiguous stimuli. When presented with typical male and female voices, CI users’ scores were 19 percent lower than people with normal hearing. Greater experience with a CI conveyed no significant improvement.
0 Comments
Submit a Comment
Submit A Comment
Name
Comment Title
Comment


This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account ×
FROM THIS ISSUE
January 2014
Volume 19, Issue 1