On the Structure of Phoneme Categories in Listeners With Cochlear Implants

• Published in: Journal of speech, language, and hearing research language, and hearing research, 2007-02, Vol.50 (1), p.2-14
• Main Authors: Lane, Harlan, Denny, Margaret, Guenther, Frank H, Hanson, Helen M, Marrone, Nicole, Matthies, Melanie L, Perkell, Joseph S, Stockmann, Ellen, Tiede, Mark, Vick, Jennell, Zandipour, Majid
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Analysis; Assistive Technology; Auditory Discrimination; Auditory Perception; Classification; Cochlear Implants; Coding; Deaf; Ear diseases; Ears & hearing; Electrodes; Evidence; Female; Health aspects; Hearing impairment; Hearing Impairments; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - surgery; Humans; Listening Comprehension; Male; Middle Aged; Phonemes; Phonemics; Phonetics; Speech; Speech Discrimination Tests; Speech Perception; Stimuli; Studies; Vowels
• ISSN: 1092-4388; 1558-9102
• DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/001)

Margaret Denny Massachusetts Institute of Technology Frank H. Guenther Boston University, Boston, MA, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Helen M. Hanson Massachusetts Institute of Technology Nicole Marrone Boston University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Melanie L. Matthies Boston University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joseph S. Perkell Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University Ellen Stockmann Massachusetts Institute of Technology Mark Tiede Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT Jennell Vick University of Washington, Seattle, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Majid Zandipour Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University Contact author: Harlan Lane, Speech Communication Group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge MA 02139. E-mail: harlan{at}speech.mit.edu . Purpose: To describe cochlear implant users' phoneme labeling, discrimination, and prototypes for a vowel and a sibilant contrast, and to assess the effects of 1 year's experience with prosthetic hearing. Method: Based on naturally produced clear examples of "boot," "beet," "said," and "shed" by 1 male and 1 female speaker, continua with 13 stimuli were synthesized for each contrast. Seven hearing controls labeled those stimuli and assigned them goodness ratings, as did 7 implant users at 1-month postimplant. One year later, these measures were repeated, and within category discrimination, d ', was assessed. Results: Compared with controls, implant users' vowel and sibilant labeling slopes were substantially shallower but improved over 1 year of prosthesis use. Their sensitivity to phonetic differences within phoneme categories was about half that of controls. The slopes of their goodness rating functions were shallower and did not improve. Their prototypes for the sibilant contrast (but not the vowels) were closer to one another and did not improve by moving apart. Conclusions: Implant users' phoneme labeling and within-category perceptual structure were anomalous at 1-month postimplant. After 1 year of prosthesis use, phoneme labeling categories had sharpened but within category discrimination was well below that of hearing controls. KEY WORDS: speech perception, cochlear implants, hearing loss CiteULike     Connotea     Del.icio.us     Digg     Facebook     Reddit     Technorati     Twitter     What's this?