Comparison of word-, sentence-, and phoneme-based training strategies in improving the perception of spectrally distorted speech.

PURPOSE To compare the effectiveness of 3 self-administered strategies for auditory training that might improve speech perception by adult users of cochlear implants. The strategies are based, respectively, on discriminating isolated words, words in sentences, and phonemes in nonsense syllables. METHOD Participants were 18 normal-hearing adults who listened to speech processed by a noise-excited vocoder to simulate the information provided by a cochlear implant. They were assigned randomly to word-, sentence-, or phoneme-based training and underwent 9 training sessions (20 min each) on separate days over a 2- to 3-week period. The effectiveness of training was assessed as the improvement in accuracy of discriminating vowels and consonants, as well as identifying words in sentences, relative to participants' best performance in repeated tests prior to training. RESULTS Word- and sentence-based training led to significant improvements in the ability to identify words in sentences that were significantly larger than the improvements produced by phoneme-based training. There were no significant differences between the effectiveness of word- and sentence-based training. No significant improvements in consonant or vowel discrimination were found for the sentence- or phoneme-based training groups, but some improvements were found for the word-based training group. CONCLUSION The word- and sentence-based training strategies were more effective than the phoneme-based strategy at improving the perception of spectrally distorted speech.

[1]  K. Robinson,et al.  Adult auditory learning and training. , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[2]  Richard S. Tyler,et al.  Cochlear Implantation: Relationships with Research on Auditory Deprivation and Acclimatization , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[3]  Yukari Hirata,et al.  Training native English speakers to perceive Japanese length contrasts in word versus sentence contexts. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  John Bamford,et al.  Speech-hearing tests and the spoken language of hearing-impaired children , 1979 .

[5]  S. Greenspan,et al.  Perceptual learning of synthetic speech produced by rule. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[6]  IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements , 1969, IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics.

[7]  Steven L. Miller,et al.  Language Comprehension in Language-Learning Impaired Children Improved with Acoustically Modified Speech , 1996, Science.

[8]  Sygal Amitay,et al.  Discrimination learning induced by training with identical stimuli , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[9]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  The Right Information May Matter More Than Frequency-Place Alignment: Simulations of Frequency-Aligned and Upward Shifting Cochlear Implant Processors for a Shallow Electrode Array Insertion , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[10]  B J Gantz,et al.  Performance over time of adult patients using the Ineraid or nucleus cochlear implant. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Moderate auditory training can improve speech performance of adult cochlear implant patients , 2005 .

[12]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues , 1995, Science.

[13]  B L Scott,et al.  A method for training and evaluating the reception of ongoing speech. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  A. Faulkner,et al.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  M. Svirsky,et al.  Auditory learning and adaptation after cochlear implantation: a preliminary study of discrimination and labeling of vowel sounds by cochlear implant users. , 2001, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[16]  Recommended procedures for pure-tone audiometry using a manually operated instrument. , 1981, The Journal of laryngology and otology.

[17]  Joy F. Rosenberg,et al.  Discrimination training of phonemic contrasts enhances phonological processing in mainstream school children , 2005, Brain and Language.

[18]  B E Walden,et al.  Some effects of training on speech recognition by hearing-impaired adults. , 1981, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[19]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  James M. McQueen,et al.  Lexically-driven perceptual adjustments of vowel categories , 2005 .

[21]  H. Levitt.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  J. Galvin,et al.  Effects of auditory training on adult cochlear implant patients: a preliminary report , 2004, Cochlear implants international.

[23]  Paula C. Stacey,et al.  Effectiveness of computer-based auditory training in improving the perception of noise-vocoded speech. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Auditory Training with Spectrally Shifted Speech: Implications for Cochlear Implant Patient Auditory Rehabilitation , 2005, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[25]  D. Norris,et al.  Perceptual learning in speech , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[26]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  D. D. Greenwood.  A cochlear frequency-position function for several species--29 years later. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.