differences in perception of musical stimuli among
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Sandra Prentiss, PhD, David Friedland, PhD, MD, John Nash, MD, Christina Runge, PhD
Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among Acoustic, Electric and
Combined Modality Listeners
![Page 2: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Disclosures • Dr. Christina Runge is a research consultant
for MED-EL and Novartis • Dr. David Friedland is a member of MED-EL
surgical advisory board
![Page 3: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Introduction • Cochlear implants are effective for speech
understanding • Music perception remains challenging • Music is rated as the second most important
aspect to hearing next to speech • Pitch-related tasks and instrument identification
are the most difficult for cochlear implant users
![Page 4: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Study Goals
• Identify differences in music perception among CI users, bimodal users, bilateral hearing aid users and normal hearing controls
![Page 5: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Hypothesis
• Performance will increase as more acoustic information is available
![Page 6: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Subjects • 56 adults evenly represented in 4 listening
configurations 1. Unilateral cochlear implant (CI) 2. Bimodal listeners – hearing aid on the
contralateral ear (CIHA) 3. Bilateral hearing aids (HAHA) 4. Normal hearing listeners (NH)
![Page 7: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Subjects • All implant participants were post-lingually
deafened with at least 6 months of listening experience
• None of the participants were professionally trained musicians
![Page 8: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Methods • IRB approved • Mu.S.I.C. – Musical Sound in Cochlear implants software
(Fitzgerald et. al, 2006) • Chord discrimination
– Listen to two chords (55 Hz – 1174 Hz) – Same or different task
• Instrument identification – Listen to a C-major scale – 10 instrument forced-choice identification task
![Page 9: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Chord Discrimination
![Page 10: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Timbre Perception
![Page 11: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Results %
Cor
rect
Listening Configuration
Chord Discrimination
CI CIHA HAHA NH0
20
40
60
80
100
120*
**
**
![Page 12: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Results
CI CIHA HAHA NH0
20
40
60
80
100
120*
* **
*
Timbre Perception %
Cor
rect
Listening Configuration
![Page 13: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Results
CI CIHA HAHA NH0
20
40
60
80
100
120Mean ChordsMean Timbre *
**
Chords and Timbre %
Cor
rect
Listening Configuration
![Page 14: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Discussion • Chord discrimination and timbre
perception are reduced in groups with hearing loss
• Timbre perception was easiest with normal hearing yet most difficult with electric hearing
![Page 15: Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli Among](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052821/628fc560dde8416f94298c99/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Discussion • Further analysis of timbre characteristics
may help identify components of music that are poorly represented in electric hearing
• May contribute to advancements in programming strategies