Hearing with Cochlear Implants and Hearing Aids in Complex Auditory Scenes
One of the most important tasks that humans face is communication in complex, noisy acoustic environments. In this chapter, the focus is on populations of children and adult listeners who suffer from hearing loss and are fitted with cochlear implants (CIs) and/or hearing aids (HAs) in order to hear. The clinical trend is to provide patients with the ability to hear in both ears. This trend to stimulate patients in both ears has stemmed from decades of research with normal-hearing (NH) listeners, demonstrating the importance of binaural and spatial cues for segregating multiple sound sources. There are important effects due to the type of stimuli used, testing parameters, and auditory task utilized. The review of research in hearing impaired populations notes auditory cues that are potentially available to users of CIs and HAs. In addition, there is discussion of limitations resulting from the ways that devices handle auditory cues, auditory deprivation, and other factors that are inherently problematic for these patients.
KeywordsCochlear implants Cocktail party Hearing loss Noise Speech understanding
Compliance with Ethics Requirements
Ruth Litovsky received travel support for a conference from Cochlear Ltd. and from MedEl.
Matthew Goupell had no conflicts of interest.
Alan Kan owns stocks in Cochlear Ltd.
Sara Misurelli had no conflicts of interest.
- Aronoff, J. M., Yoon, Y. S., Freed, D. J., Vermiglio, A. J., et al. (2010). The use of interaural time and level difference cues by bilateral cochlear implant users. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127(3), EL87–EL92.Google Scholar
- Bernstein, L. R., & Trahiotis, C. (2002). Enhancing sensitivity to interaural delays at high frequencies by using “transposed stimuli.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112(3 Pt. 1), 1026–1036.Google Scholar
- Bronkhorst, A. W. (2000). The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 86(1), 117–128.Google Scholar
- Chung, K. (2004). Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies and noise reduction algorithms. Trends in Amplification, 8(3), 83–124.Google Scholar
- Churchill, T. H., Kan, A., Goupell, M. J., & Litovsky, R. Y. (2014). Spatial hearing benefits demonstrated with presentation of acoustic temporal fine structure cues in bilateral cochlear implant listenersa). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 136(3), 1246–1256.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Dillon, H. (2012). Hearing aids. New York: Thieme.Google Scholar
- Garadat, S. N., Litovsky, R. Y., Yu, G., & Zeng, F.-G. (2010). Effects of simulated spectral holes on speech intelligibility and spatial release from masking under binaural and monaural listening. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127(2), 977–989.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Goupell, M. J., Kan, A., & Litovsky, R. Y. (2013). Mapping procedures can produce non-centered auditory images in bilateral cochlear implantees. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 133(2), EL101–EL107.Google Scholar
- Kates, J. M., & Arehart, K. H. (2005). A model of speech intelligibility and quality in hearing aids. In IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (WASPAA), New Paltz, NY, October 16–19, 2005.Google Scholar
- Loizou, P. C. (2006). Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants (Vol. 64). Basel, Switzerland: Karger.Google Scholar
- Poon, B. B., Eddington, D. K., Noel, V., & Colburn, H. S. (2009). Sensitivity to interaural time difference with bilateral cochlear implants: Development over time and effect of interaural electrode spacing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126(2), 806–815.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- van Hoesel, R. J., Jones, G. L., & Litovsky, R. Y. (2009). Interaural time-delay sensitivity in bilateral cochlear implant users: Effects of pulse rate, modulation rate, and place of stimulation. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 10(4), 557–567.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Watson, C. S. (2005). Some comments on informational masking. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 91(3), 502–512.Google Scholar
- Zeng, F.-G., Popper, A., & Fay, R. R. (2011). Auditory prostheses: New horizons. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar