인공와우 및 보청기 착용자의 단음절, 환경음 인지도와 오류패턴 비교
Comparison of word and environmental sound recognition by cochlear implant and hearing aid users
2
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study aimed to compare the word and environmental sound recognition by cochlear implant (CI) and hearing aid (HA) users. Nine CI adult users and 8 HA adult users identified 200 monosyllabic words in the open-set condition and 80 environmental sounds in the closed-set format using pictures. All the target sounds were presented at 65 dB SPL. Five main findings were observed as follows. First, word and environmental sound recognition performance of both CI and HA groups was less than 50% accuracy, on average. Second, overall, recognition of environmental sounds was superior to that of monosyllabic words for both groups. Third, a large individual difference in recognition performance was found for both listener groups, regardless of the type of target sounds. Fourth, a strong and positive relation between word and environmental sound recognition performances, indicating that listeners who better recognized the closed-set environmental sounds were also superior to recognize the open-set monosyllabic words. Fifth, the analysis of listeners' errors for word recognition showed that the common error types were word substitution, no response, initial or final consonant substitution errors. The results of this study motivate further research on the development of closed-set recognition test or auditory training protocol using environmental sounds, especially for deaf population who have difficulty in open-set word recognition.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the word and environmental sound recognition by cochlear implant (CI) and hearing aid (HA) users. Nine CI adult users and 8 HA adult users identified 200 monosyllabic words in the open-set condition and 80 environmental sounds in the closed-set format using pictures. All the target sounds were presented at 65 dB SPL. Five main findings were observed as follows. First, word and environmental sound recognition performance of both CI and HA groups was less than 50% accuracy, on average. Second, overall, recognition of environmental sounds was superior to that of monosyllabic words for both groups. Third, a large individual difference in recognition performance was found for both listener groups, regardless of the type of target sounds. Fourth, a strong and positive relation between word and environmental sound recognition performances, indicating that listeners who better recognized the closed-set environmental sounds were also superior to recognize the open-set monosyllabic words. Fifth, the analysis of listeners' errors for word recognition showed that the common error types were word substitution, no response, initial or final consonant substitution errors. The results of this study motivate further research on the development of closed-set recognition test or auditory training protocol using environmental sounds, especially for deaf population who have difficulty in open-set word recognition.
참고문헌 (19)
- 김진숙, "한국어 유의미 단음절의 주파수 분석 연구", 청능재활, 6(1), pp.37~49 (2010), 한국청각언어재활학회
- 김진숙, "한국 표준 일반용 단음절어표 개발", 청능재활, 4, pp.126~140 (2008)
- 함태영, "난청환자의 한국어음에 대한 명료도에 관한 연구", 대한 이비인후과학회지, 6, pp.19~36 (1963)
- Donaldson GS, "Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users", Ear Hear, 27(6), pp.658~677 (2006)
- Gygi B, "Spectral-temporal factors in the identification of environmental sounds", J Acoust Soc Am, 115(3), pp.1252~1265 (2004)
- Inverso Y, "Cochlear implant-mediated perception of nonlinguistic sounds", Ear Hear, 31(4), pp.505~514 (2010)
- Looi V, "Comparisons of quality ratings for music by cochlear implant and hearing aid users", Ear Hear, 28(2 Suppl), pp.59S~61S (2007)
- Looi V, "Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users", Ear Hear, 29(3), pp.421~434 (2008)
- Parkinson AJ, "Speech perception performance in experienced cochlear-implant patients receiving the SPEAK processing strategy in the Nucleus Spectra-22 cochlear implant", J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41(5), pp.1073~1087 (1998)
- Peterson GE, "Control methods used in a study of the vowels", J Acoust Soc Am, 24(2), pp.175~184 (1952)
- Reed CM, "The reception of environmental sounds throught wearable tactual aids", Ear Hear, 24(6), pp.528~538 (2003)
- Reed CM, "Reception of environmental sounds through cochlear implants", Ear Hear, 26(1), pp.48~61 (2005)
- distinction in CV syllables, "J Acoust Soc Am", 1986, 1987~1999
- Shafiro V, "Development of a large-item environmental sound test and the effects of short-term training with spectrally-degraded stimuli", Ear Hear, 29(5), pp.775~790 (2008)
- Shafiro V, "Perception of environmental sounds by experienced cochlear implant patients", Ear Hear, ~ (2011)
- Tye-Murray N, "Performance over time with a Nucleus or Ineraid cochlear implant", Ear Hear, 13(3), pp.200~209 (1992)
- Tyler RS, "Advantages of disadvantages expected and reported by cochlear implant patients", Am J Otol, 15(4), pp.523~531 (1994)
- Tyler RS, "Advantages and disadvantages reported by some of the better cochlear-implant patients", Am J Otol, 11(4), pp.282~289 (1990)
- Zhao F, "The use of qualitative questionnaires in patients having and being considered for cochlear implants", Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci, 22(3), pp.254~259 (1997)