Cargando…

Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners

We assessed auditory sensitivity to three classes of temporal-envelope statistics (modulation depth, modulation rate, and comodulation) that are important for the perception of ‘sound textures’. The textures were generated by a probabilistic model that prescribes the temporal statistics of a selecte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gomersall, Philip A., Turner, Richard E., Baguley, David M., Deeks, John M., Gockel, Hedwig E., Carlyon, Robert P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4819450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26706708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2015.12.013
_version_ 1782425198620835840
author Gomersall, Philip A.
Turner, Richard E.
Baguley, David M.
Deeks, John M.
Gockel, Hedwig E.
Carlyon, Robert P.
author_facet Gomersall, Philip A.
Turner, Richard E.
Baguley, David M.
Deeks, John M.
Gockel, Hedwig E.
Carlyon, Robert P.
author_sort Gomersall, Philip A.
collection PubMed
description We assessed auditory sensitivity to three classes of temporal-envelope statistics (modulation depth, modulation rate, and comodulation) that are important for the perception of ‘sound textures’. The textures were generated by a probabilistic model that prescribes the temporal statistics of a selected number of modulation envelopes, superimposed onto noise carriers. Discrimination thresholds were measured for normal-hearing (NH) listeners and users of a MED-EL pulsar cochlear implant (CI), for separate manipulations of the average rate and modulation depth of the envelope in each frequency band of the stimulus, and of the co-modulation between bands. Normal-hearing (NH) listeners' discrimination of envelope rate was similar for baseline modulation rates of 5 and 34 Hz, and much poorer than previously reported for sinusoidally amplitude-modulated sounds. In contrast, discrimination of model parameters that controlled modulation depth was poorer at the lower baseline rate, consistent with the idea that, at the lower rate, subjects get fewer ‘looks’ at the relevant information when comparing stimuli differing in modulation depth. NH listeners could discriminate differences in co-modulation across bands; a multidimensional scaling study revealed that this was likely due to genuine across-frequency processing, rather than within-channel cues. CI users' discrimination performance was worse overall than for NH listeners, but showed a similar dependence on stimulus parameters.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4819450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48194502016-04-14 Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners Gomersall, Philip A. Turner, Richard E. Baguley, David M. Deeks, John M. Gockel, Hedwig E. Carlyon, Robert P. Hear Res Research Paper We assessed auditory sensitivity to three classes of temporal-envelope statistics (modulation depth, modulation rate, and comodulation) that are important for the perception of ‘sound textures’. The textures were generated by a probabilistic model that prescribes the temporal statistics of a selected number of modulation envelopes, superimposed onto noise carriers. Discrimination thresholds were measured for normal-hearing (NH) listeners and users of a MED-EL pulsar cochlear implant (CI), for separate manipulations of the average rate and modulation depth of the envelope in each frequency band of the stimulus, and of the co-modulation between bands. Normal-hearing (NH) listeners' discrimination of envelope rate was similar for baseline modulation rates of 5 and 34 Hz, and much poorer than previously reported for sinusoidally amplitude-modulated sounds. In contrast, discrimination of model parameters that controlled modulation depth was poorer at the lower baseline rate, consistent with the idea that, at the lower rate, subjects get fewer ‘looks’ at the relevant information when comparing stimuli differing in modulation depth. NH listeners could discriminate differences in co-modulation across bands; a multidimensional scaling study revealed that this was likely due to genuine across-frequency processing, rather than within-channel cues. CI users' discrimination performance was worse overall than for NH listeners, but showed a similar dependence on stimulus parameters. Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press 2016-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4819450/ /pubmed/26706708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2015.12.013 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Paper
Gomersall, Philip A.
Turner, Richard E.
Baguley, David M.
Deeks, John M.
Gockel, Hedwig E.
Carlyon, Robert P.
Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title_full Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title_fullStr Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title_full_unstemmed Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title_short Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
title_sort perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4819450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26706708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2015.12.013
work_keys_str_mv AT gomersallphilipa perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners
AT turnerricharde perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners
AT baguleydavidm perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners
AT deeksjohnm perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners
AT gockelhedwige perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners
AT carlyonrobertp perceptionofstochasticenvelopesbynormalhearingandcochlearimplantlisteners