Performance of Subjects Fit With the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G Cochlear Implant Devices
Open Access
- 1 May 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery
- Vol. 130 (5) , 624-628
Abstract
The cochlear implants available in the United States differ in terms of signal processing strategies and in the hardware that implements those strategies. It is likely that some of these differences in hardware and software lead to differences in subject performance. Herein we report the outcomes of an experiment in which the perception of speech, voice, and music was assessed (1) in subjects who used the Advanced Bionics Corporation (Sylmar, Calif) Hi-Focus electrode array with positioner, CII Bionic Ear behind-the-ear speech processor, and Hi-Resolution sound processing strategy (CII subjects) and (2) in subjects who used the Cochlear Corporation (Englewood, Colo) Nucleus 24 electrode array, ESPrit 3G behind-the-ear speech processor (3G), and Advanced Combination Encoder (ACE) speech coding strategy (3G subjects). Our aim was to find aspects of speech understanding that are better conveyed by one speech processing scheme than the other and to use that information to design better speech processors.Keywords
This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearingThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2002
- Development of the Hearing In Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noiseThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1994
- Stream Segregation and Peripheral ChannelingMusic Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1991
- Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizerThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1980