Louise H. Loiselle
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Louise H. Loiselle has a total of 4 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Michael F. Dorman
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
2 shared publications- René H. Gifford
Vanderbilt University
2 shared publications William A. Yost
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
2 shared publicationsSarah J. Cook
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 1 August 2016
- Published by American Speech Language Hearing Association in Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Vol. 59 (4) , 810-818
Using ILD or ITD Cues for Sound Source Localization and Speech Understanding in a Complex Listening Environment by Listeners With Bilateral and With Hearing-Preservation Cochlear Implants
Purpose: To assess the role of interaural time differences and interaural level differences in (a) sound-source localization, and (b) speech understanding in a cocktail party listening environment for listeners with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) and for listeners with hearing-preservation CIs. Methods: Eleven bilateral listeners with MED-EL (Durham, NC) CIs and 8 listeners with hearing-preservation CIs with symmetrical low frequency, acoustic hearing using the MED-EL or Cochlear device were evaluated using 2 tests designed to task binaural hearing, localization, and a simulated cocktail party. Access to interaural cues for localization was constrained by the use of low-pass, high-pass, and wideband noise stimuli. Results: Sound-source localization accuracy for listeners with bilateral CIs in response to the high-pass noise stimulus and sound-source localization accuracy for the listeners with hearing-preservation CIs in response to the low-pass noise stimulus did not differ significantly. Speech understanding in a cocktail party listening environment improved for all listeners when interaural cues, either interaural time difference or interaural level difference, were available. Conclusions: The findings of the current study indicate that similar degrees of benefit to sound-source localization and speech understanding in complex listening environments are possible with 2 very different rehabilitation strategies: the provision of bilateral CIs and the preservation of hearing.
- 1 August 2016
- Published by American Speech Language Hearing Association in Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Vol. 59 (4) , 810-818
Using ILD or ITD Cues for Sound Source Localization and Speech Understanding in a Complex Listening Environment by Listeners With Bilateral and With Hearing-Preservation Cochlear Implants
Purpose: To assess the role of interaural time differences and interaural level differences in (a) sound-source localization, and (b) speech understanding in a cocktail party listening environment for listeners with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) and for listeners with hearing-preservation CIs. Methods: Eleven bilateral listeners with MED-EL (Durham, NC) CIs and 8 listeners with hearing-preservation CIs with symmetrical low frequency, acoustic hearing using the MED-EL or Cochlear device were evaluated using 2 tests designed to task binaural hearing, localization, and a simulated cocktail party. Access to interaural cues for localization was constrained by the use of low-pass, high-pass, and wideband noise stimuli. Results: Sound-source localization accuracy for listeners with bilateral CIs in response to the high-pass noise stimulus and sound-source localization accuracy for the listeners with hearing-preservation CIs in response to the low-pass noise stimulus did not differ significantly. Speech understanding in a cocktail party listening environment improved for all listeners when interaural cues, either interaural time difference or interaural level difference, were available. Conclusions: The findings of the current study indicate that similar degrees of benefit to sound-source localization and speech understanding in complex listening environments are possible with 2 very different rehabilitation strategies: the provision of bilateral CIs and the preservation of hearing.
- Open Access
- 1 April 2015
- Published by S. Karger AG in Audiology and Neurotology
- Vol. 20 (3) , 166-171
Sound Source Localization by Hearing Preservation Patients with and without Symmetrical Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing
The aim of this article was to study sound source localization by cochlear implant (CI) listeners with low-frequency (LF) acoustic hearing in both the operated ear and in the contralateral ear. Eight CI listeners had symmetrical LF acoustic hearing and 4 had asymmetrical LF acoustic hearing. The effects of two variables were assessed: (i) the symmetry of the LF thresholds in the two ears and (ii) the presence/absence of bilateral acoustic amplification. Stimuli consisted of low-pass, high-pass, and wideband noise bursts presented in the frontal horizontal plane. Localization accuracy was 23° of error for the symmetrical listeners and 76° of error for the asymmetrical listeners. The presence of a unilateral CI used in conjunction with bilateral LF acoustic hearing does not impair sound source localization accuracy, but amplification for acoustic hearing can be detrimental to sound source localization accuracy.
- 1 April 2015
- Published by S. Karger AG in Audiology and Neurotology
- Vol. 20 (3) , 166-171
Open AccessSound Source Localization by Hearing Preservation Patients with and without Symmetrical Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing
The aim of this article was to study sound source localization by cochlear implant (CI) listeners with low-frequency (LF) acoustic hearing in both the operated ear and in the contralateral ear. Eight CI listeners had symmetrical LF acoustic hearing and 4 had asymmetrical LF acoustic hearing. The effects of two variables were assessed: (i) the symmetry of the LF thresholds in the two ears and (ii) the presence/absence of bilateral acoustic amplification. Stimuli consisted of low-pass, high-pass, and wideband noise bursts presented in the frontal horizontal plane. Localization accuracy was 23° of error for the symmetrical listeners and 76° of error for the asymmetrical listeners. The presence of a unilateral CI used in conjunction with bilateral LF acoustic hearing does not impair sound source localization accuracy, but amplification for acoustic hearing can be detrimental to sound source localization accuracy.