Speech Perception by Four Single-Channel Cochlear Implant Users Four profoundly deaf adults, each a recent recipient of a scala tympani implant, underwent auditory and auditory-visual speech comprehension evaluations. Two subjects had multiple-electrode auditory prostheses, and 2 had single-electrode implants. All subjects were tested preoperatively with a high-power hearing aid, and postoperatively with a single-channel wearable sound processor. Reported ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 1987
Speech Perception by Four Single-Channel Cochlear Implant Users
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Laurel J. Dent
    Stanford University School of Medicine; Stanford Electronics Laboratories
  • F. Blair Simmons
    Stanford University School of Medicine
  • Robert L. White
    Stanford University
  • Robert A. Roberts
    Stanford Electronics Laboratories
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 1987
Speech Perception by Four Single-Channel Cochlear Implant Users
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1987, Vol. 30, 480-493. doi:10.1044/jshr.3004.480
History: Received June 26, 1985 , Accepted March 5, 1987
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1987, Vol. 30, 480-493. doi:10.1044/jshr.3004.480
History: Received June 26, 1985; Accepted March 5, 1987

Four profoundly deaf adults, each a recent recipient of a scala tympani implant, underwent auditory and auditory-visual speech comprehension evaluations. Two subjects had multiple-electrode auditory prostheses, and 2 had single-electrode implants. All subjects were tested preoperatively with a high-power hearing aid, and postoperatively with a single-channel wearable sound processor. Reported here are the results of the first formal speech recognition tests which were conducted during the 8 months after the sound processor fitting. Three subjects had used the single-channel processor on a daily basis for up to 8 months at the time of postoperative testing. The 4th subject was a nonuser. On listening tests, a comparison between pre- and post-implant scores revealed little difference for any subject. On postoperative speechreading tasks, all subjects identified medial consonant phonemes and 2-digit numerals better with stimulation than without. The 3 frequent users of the device experienced significant improvement on connected-discourse tracking, and their speechreading of videotaped and live voice CID Everyday Sentences (Davis & Silverman, 1978) was enhanced with the addition of stimulation. The nonuser was a very proficient speechreader at the outset and exhibited no significant difference on connected-discourse tracking with and without stimulation. Moreover her ability to speechread Everyday Sentences was hampered slightly by the addition of stimulation. This single-channel sound processor functioned as a sensory supplement for the 3 frequent users, but no subject was able to use the processor as a sensory substitute.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access