Adjustments of the amplitude mapping function: Sensitivity of cochlear implant users and effects on subjective preference and speech recognition

References

• Aronoff J.M., Yoon Y.S., Freed D.J., Vermiglio A.J., Pal I., et al. 2010. The use of interaural time and level difference cues by bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 127(3), EL87–EL92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blamey P.J. 2005. Adaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO): A digital amplification strategy for hearing aids and cochlear implants. Trends Amplif, 9, 77–98.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brand T. 2000. Analysis and optimization of psychophysical procedures in audiology. Thesis Universität Oldenburg. Chapter 1.
   Google Scholar
• Brand T. & Kollmeier B. 2002. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. J Acoust Soc Am, 111(6), 2801–2810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chua T.E.H., Bachman M. & Zeng F. 2011. Intensity coding in electric hearing effect of electrode configuration and stimulation waveforms. Ear Hear, 32(1), 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Francart T., Lenssen A. & Wouters J. 2011. Enhancement of interaural level differences improves sound localization in bimodal listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 130(5), 2817–2826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu Q.J. & Shannon R.V. 1998. Effects of amplitude nonlinearity on phoneme recognition by cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 2570–2577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu Q.J. & Shannon R.V. 2000. Effects of dynamic range and amplitude mapping on phoneme recognition in Nucleus-22 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear, 21(3), 227–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallégo S. & Micheyl C. 1998. Intensity discrimination and auditory brainstem responses in cochlear implant and normal-hearing listeners. Behav Neurosci, 112(4), 793–799.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galvin J.J III. & Fu Q.J. 2005. Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 6(3), 269–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galvin J.J III. & Fu Q.J. 2009. Influence of stimulation rate and loudness growth on modulation detection and intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users. Hear Res, 250(1-2), 46–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goupell M.J., Kan A. & Litovsky R.Y. 2013. Mapping procedures can produce non-centered auditory images in bilateral cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am, 133(2), EL101–EL107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grantham D.W., Ashmead D.H., Ricketts T.A., Labadie R.F. & Hayness D.S. 2007. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 28(4), 524–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoth S. 2007. Indication for the need of flexible and frequency specific mapping functions in cochlear implant speech processors. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 264(2), 129–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoth S. & Mϋller-Deile J. 2009. Audiologische rehabilitation von kochleaimplantat-Trägern. HNO, 57, 635–648.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houben A.C.H., Koopman J., Luts H., Wagener K., van Wieringen A., et al. 2014. Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol, 53(10), 760–763.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khing P.P., Swanson B.A. & Ambikairajah E. 2013. The effect of automatic gain control structure and release time on cochlear implant speech intelligibility. PLoS One, 8, e82263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreft H.A., Donaldson G.S. & Nelson D.A. 2004. Effects of pulse rate and electrode array design on intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 116(4 PT 1), 2258–2268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt H. 1971. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49(2), 467–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littell R.C., Pendergast J. & Natarajan R. 2004. Modelling covariance structure in the analysis of repeated measures data. D’Agostino, R.B. (ed.), Tutorials in Biostatistics: Statistical Modelling of Complex Medical Data, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, p. 166.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson D.A., Schmitz J.L., Donaldson G.S., Viemeister N.F. & Javel E. 1996. Intensity discrimination as a function of stimulus level with electric stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am, 100(4), 2393–2314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfingst B.E., Xu L. & Thompson C.S. 2007. Effects of carrier pulse rate and stimulation site on modulation detection by subjects with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 121(4), 2236–2246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfingst B.E., Burkholder-Juhasz R.A., Xu L. & Thompson C.S. 2008. Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 123(2), 1054–1062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoen F., Mueller J., Helms J. & Nopp P. 2005. Sound localization and sensitivity to interaural cues in bilateral users of the Med-El Combi 40/40+ cochlear implant system. Otol Neurotol, 26(3), 429–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theelen-van den Hoek F.L., Houben R. & Dreschler W.A. 2014. Investigation into the applicability and optimization of the Dutch matrix sentence test for use with cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol, 53(11), 817–828.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hoesel R.J. & Tyler R.S. 2003. Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 113(3), 1617–1630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willeboer C. 2008. Simplifying cochlear implant speech processor fitting. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht, Universal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zeng F.G. & Galvin J.J. III, 1999. Amplitude mapping and phoneme recognition in cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear, 20(1), 60–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou N. & Pfingst B.E. 2014. Effects of site-specific level adjustments on speech recognition with cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 35(1), 30–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar