Voice Discrimination by Adults with Cochlear Implants: the Benefits of Early Implantation for Vocal-Tract Length Perception

  • Yael Zaltz
  • Raymond L. Goldsworthy
  • Liat Kishon-Rabin
  • Laurie S. Eisenberg
Research Article


Cochlear implant (CI) users find it extremely difficult to discriminate between talkers, which may partially explain why they struggle to understand speech in a multi-talker environment. Recent studies, based on findings with postlingually deafened CI users, suggest that these difficulties may stem from their limited use of vocal-tract length (VTL) cues due to the degraded spectral resolution transmitted by the CI device. The aim of the present study was to assess the ability of adult CI users who had no prior acoustic experience, i.e., prelingually deafened adults, to discriminate between resynthesized “talkers” based on either fundamental frequency (F0) cues, VTL cues, or both. Performance was compared to individuals with normal hearing (NH), listening either to degraded stimuli, using a noise-excited channel vocoder, or non-degraded stimuli. Results show that (a) age of implantation was associated with VTL but not F0 cues in discriminating between talkers, with improved discrimination for those subjects who were implanted at earlier age; (b) there was a positive relationship for the CI users between VTL discrimination and speech recognition score in quiet and in noise, but not with frequency discrimination or cognitive abilities; (c) early-implanted CI users showed similar voice discrimination ability as the NH adults who listened to vocoded stimuli. These data support the notion that voice discrimination is limited by the speech processing of the CI device. However, they also suggest that early implantation may facilitate sensory-driven tonotopicity and/or improve higher-order auditory functions, enabling better perception of VTL spectral cues for voice discrimination.


cochlear implant voice discrimination talker discrimination VTL vocal-tract length early implantation 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Barone P, Lacassagne L, Kral A (2013) Reorganization of the connectivity of cortical field DZ in congenitally deaf cat. PLoS One 8(4):e60093. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Baskent D, Gaudrain E (2016) Musicians advantage for speech-on-speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 139(3):EL51–EL56. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Belin P, Fecteau S, Bedard C (2004) Thinking the voice: neural correlates of voice perception. Trends Cogn Sci 8(3):129–135. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Blauert J (1997) Spatial hearing: the psychophysics of human spatial localization. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Boothroyd A (1968) Statistical theory of the speech discrimination score. J Acoust Soc Am 43(2):362–367. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bronkhorst AW (2015) The cocktail-party problem revisited: early processing and selection of multi-talker speech. Atten Percept Psychophys 77(5):1465–1487. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Chatterjee M, Peng SC (2008) Processing F0 with cochlear implants: modulation frequency discrimination and speech intonation recognition. Hear Res 235(1-2):143–156. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chuenwattanapranithi S, Xu Y, Thipakorn B, Maneewongvatana S (2008) Encoding emotions in speech with the size code. A perceptual investigation. Phonetica 65(4):210–230. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Coez A, Zilbovicius M, Ferrary E, Bouccara D, Mosnier I, Ambert-Dahan E, Bizaguet E, Syrota A, Samson Y, Sterkers O (2008) Cochlear implant benefits in deafness rehabilitation: PET study of temporal voice activations. J Nucl Med 49(1):60–67. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Conway CM, Pisoni DB, Kronenberger WG (2009) The importance of sound for cognitive sequencing abilities: the auditory scaffolding hypothesis. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 18(5):275–279. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Cullington HE, Zeng FG (2011) Comparison of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant users on speech recognition with competing talker, music perception, affective prosody discrimination, and talker identification. Ear Hear 32(1):16–30. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Darwin CJ, Brungart DS, Simpson BD (2003) Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length changes on attention to one of two simultaneous talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 114(5):2913–2922. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Dinse HR, Reuter G, Cords SM, Godde B, Hilger T, Lenarz T (1997) Optical imaging of cat auditory cortical organization after electrical stimulation of a multichannel cochlear implant: differential effects of acute and chronic stimulation. Am J Otol 8(Suppl):S17–S18Google Scholar
  14. Donaldson GS, Nelson DA (2000) Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies. J Acoust Soc Am 107(3):1645–1658. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fallon JB, Irvine DR, Shepherd RK (2009) Cochlear implant use following neonatal deafness influences the cochleotopic organization of the primary auditory cortex in cats. J Comp Neurol 512(1):101–114. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Fallon JB, Shepherd RK, Nayagam DA, Wise AK, Heffer LF, Landry TG, Irvine DR (2014a) Effects of deafness and cochlear implant use on temporal response characteristics in cat primary auditory cortex. Hear Res 315:1–9. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fallon JB, Shepherd RK, Irvine DR (2014b) Effects of chronic cochlear electrical stimulation after an extended period of profound deafness on primary auditory cortex organization in cats. Eur J Neurosci 39(5):811–820. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Figueras B, Edwards L, Langdon D (2008) Executive function and language in deaf children. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 13(3):362–377. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Friesen LM, Shannon RV, Baskent D, Wang X (2001) Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 110(2):1150–1163. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fu QJ, Shannon RV, Wang X (1998) Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 104:3586–3596CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fu QJ, Chinchilla S, Galvin JJ 3rd (2004) The role of spectral and temporal cues in voice gender discrimination by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5:253–260CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Fu QJ, Chinchilla S, Nogaki G, Galvin JJ 3rd (2005) Voice gender identification by cochlear implant users: the role of spectral and temporal resolution. J Acoust Soc Am 118:1711–1718CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuller C, Gaudrain E, Clarke J, Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Free R, Baskent D (2014) Gender categorization is abnormal in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 15: 1037–1048., 6
  24. Galantucci B, Fowler CA, Turvey MT (2006) The motor theory of speech perception reviewed. Psychon Bull Rev 13(3):361–377. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Gaudrain E, Başkent D (2015) Factors limiting vocal-tract length discrimination in cochlear implant simulations. J Acoust Soc Am 137(3):1298–1308. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Goldsworthy RL, Delhorne LA, Braida LD, Reed CM (2013) Psychoacoustic and phoneme identification measures in cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners. Trends Amplif 17(1):27–44. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Gordon KA, Papsin BC, Harrison RV (2005) Effects of cochlear implant use on the electrically evoked middle latency response in children. Hear Res 204(1-2):78–89. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Griffiths TD, Warren JD (2004) What is an auditory object? Nat Rev Neurosci 5(11):887–892. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Han D, Liu B, Zhou N, Chen X, Kong Y, Liu H, Zheng Y, Xu L (2009) Lexical tone perception with HiResolution and HiResolution 120 sound-processing strategies in pediatric Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 30(2):169–177. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Henry BA, Turner CW, Behrens A (2005) Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 118(2):1111–1121. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Huttenlocher PR, Dabholkar AS (1997) Regional differences in synaptogenesis in human cerebral cortex. J Comp Neurol 387(2):167–178.<167::AID-CNE1>3.0.CO;2-Z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones GL, Won JH, Drennan WR, Rubinstein JT (2013) Relationship between channel interaction and spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 133(1):425–433. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Kania RE, Hartl DM, Hans S, Maeda S, Vaissiere J, Brasnu DF (2006) Fundamental frequency histograms measured by electroglottography during speech: a pilot study for standardization. J Voice 20(1):18–24. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kishon-Rabin L, Patael S, Menahemi M, Amir N (2004) Are the perceptual effects of spectral smearing influenced by speaker gender? J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 15:41–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Kollemeier MA (2015) Overcoming language barriers: Matrix sentence tests with closed speech corpora. Int J Audiol 54(Suppl 2):1–2. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kopelovich JC, Eisen MD, Franck KH (2010) Frequency and electrode discrimination in children with cochlear implants. Hear Res 268(1-2):105–113. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Kovačić D, Balaban E (2010) Hearing history influences voice gender perceptual performance in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 31(6):806–814. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Kral A (2013) Auditory critical periods: a review from system’s perspective. Neuroscience 247:117–133. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Kral A, Tillein J (2006) Brain plasticity under cochlear implant stimulation. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 64:89–108. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Kral A, Hartmann R, Tillein J, Heid S, Klinke R (2002) Hearing after congenital deafness: central auditory plasticity and sensory deprivation. Cereb Cortex 12(8):797–807. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Kral A, Tillein J, Heid S, Hartmann R, Klinke R (2005) Postnatal cortical development in congenital auditory deprivation. Cereb Cortex 15(5):552–562. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB, Henning SC, Colson BG (2013) Executive functioning skills in long-term users of cochlear implants: a case control study. J Pediatr Psychol 38(8):902–914. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Laneau J, Wouters J (2004) Mutichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5:285–294Google Scholar
  44. Laneau J, Wouters J, Moonen M (2004) Relative contributions of temporal and place pitch cues to fundamental frequency discrimination in cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am 116(6):3606–3619. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Laneau J, Wouters J, Moonen M (2006) Improved music perception with explicit pitch coding in cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 11:38–52Google Scholar
  46. Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49(2B):467–477. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Liberman AM, Mattingly IG (1985) The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition 21(1):1–36. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Liberman AM, Cooper FS, Shankweiler DP, Studdert-Kennedy M (1967) Perception of the speech code. Psychol Rev 74(6):431–461. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Luo X, QJ F, Galvin JJ 3rd (2007) Vocal emotion recognition by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. Trends Amplif 11(4):301–315. CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Luo X, Fu QJ, Wei CG, Cao KL (2008) Speech recognition and temporal amplitude modulation processing by Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 29:957–70.
  51. Luo X, Padilla M, Landsberger DM (2012) Pitch contour identification with combined place and temporal cues using cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 131(2):1325–1336. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Mackersie CL, Dewey J, Guthrie LA (2011) Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length cues on sentence segregation by listeners with hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 130(2):1006–1019. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Massida Z, Belin P, James C, Rouger J, Fraysse B, Barone P, Deguine O (2011) Voice discrimination in cochlear-implanted deaf subjects. Hear Res 275(1-2):120–129. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Massida Z, Marx M, Belin P, James C, Fraysse B, Barone P, Deguine O (2013) Gender categorization in cochlear implant users. J Speech Lang Hear Res 56(5):1389–1401. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Meister H, Fürsen K, Streicher B, Lang-Roth R, Walger M (2016) The use of voice cues for speaker gender recognition in cochlear implant recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res 59(3):546–556. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Moore BCJ, Tyler LK, Marslen-Wilsen WD (2009) The Perception of speech: from sound to meaning (revised and updated). Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  57. Morton KD, Torrione PA Jr, Throckmorton CS, Collins LM (2008) Mandarin Chinese tone identification in cochlear implants: predictions from acoustic models. Hear Res 244(1-2):66–76. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Moulines E, Charpentier F (1990) Pitch-synchronous waveform processing techniques for text-to-speech synthesis using diphones. Speech Commun 9:453–467Google Scholar
  59. Mühler R, Ziese M, Rostalski D (2009) Development of a speaker discrimination test for cochlear implant users based on the Oldenburg Logatome corpus. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 71(1):14–20. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Munson B, Nelson PB (2005) Phonetic identification in quiet and in noise by listeners with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 118(4):2607–2617. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Nelson D, Van Tasell D, Schroder A, Soli S, Levine S (1995) Electrode ranking of ‘place-pitch’ and speech recognition in electrical hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 98(4):1987–1999. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Peng SC, Tomblin JB, Cheung H, Lin YS, Wang LS (2004) Perception and production of mandarin tones in prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 25(3):251–264. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Pisoni DB, Kronenberger WG, Roman AS, Geers AE (2011) Measures of digit span and verbal rehearsal speed in deaf children after more than 10 years of cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 32(Suppl):60S–74S. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Raggio MW, Schreiner CE (1999) Neuronal responses in cat primary auditory cortex to electrical cochlear stimulation. III. Activation patterns in short- and long-term deafness. J Neurophysiol 82(6):3506–3526. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Raven manual, Section 1 (1998) Standard progressive matrices. Oxford Psychologist Press Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  66. Rogers CF, Healy EW, Montgomery AA (2006) Sensitivity to isolated and concurrent intensity and fundamental frequency increments by cochlear implant users under natural listening conditions. J Acoust Soc Am 119(4):2276–2287. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Chatterjee M (2015) Fundamental-frequency discrimination using noise-band-vocoded harmonic complexes in older listeners with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 138(3):1687–1695. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Segal O, Houston D, Kishon-Rabin L (2016) Auditory discrimination of lexical stress patterns in hearing-impaired infants with cochlear implants compared with normal hearing: influence of acoustic cues and listening experience to the ambient language. Ear Hear 37(2):225–234. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Shannon RV (1983) Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear Res 11(2):157–189. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Sharma A, Dorman MF, Kral A (2005) The influence of a sensitive period on central auditory development in children with unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants. Hear Res 203(1-2):134–143. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Shepherd RK, Hardie NA (2001) Deafness-induced changes in the auditory pathway: implications for cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 6(6):305–318. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Skuk VG, Schweinberger SR (2013) Influences of fundamental frequency, formant frequencies, aperiodicity and spectrum level on the perception of voice gender. J Speech Lang Hear Res 57(1):285–296. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smith DR, Patterson RD (2005) The interaction of glottal-pulse rate and vocal-tract length in judgements of speaker size, sex, and age. J Acoust Soc Am 118(5):3177–3186. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. Smith DR, Walters TC, Patterson RD (2007) Discrimination of speaker sex and size when glottal-pulse rate and vocal-tract length are controlled. J Acoust Soc Am 122(6):3628–3639. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. Steeneken HJM, Houtgast T (2002) Phoneme-group specific octave-band weights in predicting speech intelligibility. Speech Comm 38(3–4):399–411. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Svirsky MA, Teoh SW, Neuburger H (2004) Development of language and speech perception in congenitally, profoundly deaf children as a function of age at cochlear implantation. Audiol Neurootol 9(4):224–233. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Tao D, Deng R, Jiang Y, Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Chen B (2015) Melodic pitch perception and lexical tone perception in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 36(1):102–110. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. Tombaugh TN (2004) Trail making test A and B: normative data stratified by age and education. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 19(2):203–214. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Turgeon C, Champoux F, Lepore F, Ellemberg D (2015) Deficits in auditory frequency discrimination and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Cochlear Implants Int 16(2):88–94. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Vestergaard MD, Fyson NR, Patterson RD (2009) The interaction of vocal characteristics and audibility in the recognition of concurrent syllables. J Acoust Soc Am 125(2):1114–1124. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. Vestergaard MD, Fyson NR, Patterson RD (2011) The mutual roles of temporal glimpsing and vocal characteristics in cocktail-party listening. J Acoust Soc Am 130(1):429–439. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Vongphoe M, Zeng FG (2005) Speaker recognition with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 118(2):1055–1061. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Wechsler D (1991) Wechsler intelligence scale for children-III. The Psychological Corporation, San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  84. Winfield DA (1983) The postnatal development of synapses in the different laminae of the visual cortex in the normal kitten and in kittens with eyelid suture. Brain Res 285(2):155–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Winn MB, Won JH, Moon IJ (2016) Assessment of spectral and temporal resolution in cochlear implant users using psychoacoustic discrimination and speech cue categorization. Ear Hear 37(6):e377–e390. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. Won JH, Drennan WR, Rubinstein JT (2007) Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 8(3):384–392. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. Xu L, Pfingst BE (2008) Spectral and temporal cues for speech recognition: implications for auditory prostheses. Hear Res 242(1-2):132–140. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Zaltz Y, Roth DA, Kishon-Rabin L (2010) Does feedback matter in an auditory frequency discrimination learning task? J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 21(3):241–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Zeng FG (2002) Temporal pitch in electric hearing. Hear Res 174:101–106Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Research in Otolaryngology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication Disorders, Steyer School of Health Professions, Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel-AvivIsrael
  2. 2.USC Tina and Rick Caruso Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations