» Articles » PMID: 22803258

The Effects of Musical and Linguistic Components in Recognition of Real-world Musical Excerpts by Cochlear Implant Recipients and Normal-hearing Adults

Overview
Journal J Music Ther
Date 2012 Jul 19
PMID 22803258
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Cochlear implants (CI) are effective in transmitting salient features of speech, especially in quiet, but current CI technology is not well suited in transmission of key musical structures (e.g., melody, timbre). It is possible, however, that sung lyrics, which are commonly heard in real-world music may provide acoustical cues that support better music perception.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine how accurately adults who use CIs (n = 87) and those with normal hearing (NH) (n = 17) are able to recognize real-world music excerpts based upon musical and linguistic (lyrics) cues.

Results: CI recipients were significantly less accurate than NH listeners on recognition of real-world music with or, in particular, without lyrics; however, CI recipients whose devices transmitted acoustic plus electric stimulation were more accurate than CI recipients reliant upon electric stimulation alone (particularly items without linguistic cues). Recognition by CI recipients improved as a function of linguistic cues.

Methods: Participants were tested on melody recognition of complex melodies (pop, country, & classical styles). Results were analyzed as a function of: hearing status and history, device type (electric only or acoustic plus electric stimulation), musical style, linguistic and musical cues, speech perception scores, cognitive processing, music background, age, and in relation to self-report on listening acuity and enjoyment. Age at time of testing was negatively correlated with recognition performance.

Conclusions: These results have practical implications regarding successful participation of CI users in music-based activities that include recognition and accurate perception of real-world songs (e.g., reminiscence, lyric analysis, & listening for enjoyment).

Citing Articles

Music Perception, Appreciation, and Participation in Postlingually Deafened Adults and Cochlear Implant Users: A Systematic Literature Review.

Bleckly F, Lo C, Rapport F, Clay-Williams R Trends Hear. 2024; 28:23312165241287391.

PMID: 39582273 PMC: 11587190. DOI: 10.1177/23312165241287391.


Cochlear implant users experience the sound-to-music effect.

Kasdan A, Butera I, DeFreese A, Rowland J, Hilbun A, Gordon R Audit Percept Cogn. 2024; 7(3):179-202.

PMID: 39391629 PMC: 11463729. DOI: 10.1080/25742442.2024.2313430.


Evaluating Changes in Adult Cochlear Implant Users' Brain and Behavior Following Auditory Training.

Jeon E, Driscoll V, Mussoi B, Scheperle R, Guthe E, Gfeller K Ear Hear. 2024; 46(1):150-162.

PMID: 39044323 PMC: 11649490. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001569.


A Concert-Based Study on Melodic Contour Identification among Varied Hearing Profiles-A Preliminary Report.

Paisa R, Andersen J, Ganis F, Percy-Smith L, Serafin S J Clin Med. 2024; 13(11).

PMID: 38892853 PMC: 11172703. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113142.


Robotic assistance during cochlear implantation: the rationale for consistent, controlled speed of electrode array insertion.

Kashani R, Henslee A, Nelson R, Hansen M Front Neurol. 2024; 15:1335994.

PMID: 38318440 PMC: 10839068. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1335994.


References
1.
Dorman M, Gifford R, Spahr A, McKarns S . The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies. Audiol Neurootol. 2007; 13(2):105-12. PMC: 3559130. DOI: 10.1159/000111782. View

2.
Kong Y, Stickney G, Zeng F . Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005; 117(3 Pt 1):1351-61. DOI: 10.1121/1.1857526. View

3.
Tyler R, Summerfield A . Cochlear implantation: relationships with research on auditory deprivation and acclimatization. Ear Hear. 1996; 17(3 Suppl):38S-50S. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199617031-00005. View

4.
Pijl S . Labeling of musical interval size by cochlear implant patients and normally hearing subjects. Ear Hear. 1997; 18(5):364-72. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199710000-00002. View

5.
Gfeller K, Turner C, Mehr M, Woodworth G, Fearn R, Knutson J . Recognition of familiar melodies by adult cochlear implant recipients and normal-hearing adults. Cochlear Implants Int. 2008; 3(1):29-53. DOI: 10.1179/cim.2002.3.1.29. View