Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.308ceu
JAAA CEU Program
Volume 30, Number 8 (September 2019)Publication History
Publication Date:
25 May 2020 (online)
Questions refer to Zaleski-King et al, “Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners’ Ability to Perceive Minimal Audible Angle Differences,” 659–671.
Learner Outcomes:
Readers of this article should be able to:
-
Summarize the literature describing bimodal access to interaural level and interaural timing difference cues.
-
Discuss the limitations adversely affecting bimodal binaural integration.
CEU Questions:
-
The literature has shown that some bimodal listeners can take advantage of interaural cues when speech sources are spatially separated, based on:
-
the head shadow effect
-
binaural summation
-
interaural time difference (ITD) integration
-
-
Many of the documented binaural benefits of bimodal stimulation have been demonstrated in:
-
environments providing opportunities for “dip listening” during fluctuations in noise
-
optimized, directly controlled laboratory conditions
-
in comparison to patients with bilateral hearing aids
-
-
As high-frequency content increases, interaural level differences (ILDs) are:
-
more salient
-
less salient
-
unchanged
-
-
Hearing aid processing produces a(n) _______ timing delay in comparison to cochlear implant (CI) processors, resulting in ________.
-
smaller, difficulty for computation of neural cues
-
larger, difficulty for computation of neural cues
-
equivalent, optimized binaural computation
-
-
A broadband stimulus was used in the study to:
-
optimize ILD cues
-
improve access to overall loudness cues
-
provide an opportunity for acoustic and electric stimulation overlap
-
-
The interdevice delay (IDD) was used in this study to represent:
-
the difference in delay required for lateralization of the broadband stimulus
-
the delay between the hearing aid (HA) and CI processors required for the listener to achieve a percept of a centered, single stimulus
-
the loudness difference required for equal between-ear intensity percept
-
-
The results of this study generally showed that:
-
providing ITD access to bimodal listeners can be achieved through determining the IDD
-
providing localization information to bimodal listeners necessitates more substantial changes to device speech-processing algorithms and fitting procedures
-
providing access to ILDs requires monaural listening for bimodal patients
-
-
The authors hypothesized the Listener B6 demonstrated greater difficulty establishing differences in loudness cues because:
-
this listener could not identify ITDs
-
this listener had the most pronounced low-frequency hearing loss in the hearing aid ear
-
this listener had the least experience listening bimodally
-
-
One limitation identified by the authors that might have contributed to the variability in interaural loudness perception:
-
differences in compression ratios
-
differences in age of participants
-
differences in hearing aid manufacturer/model
-
-
In conclusion, the high variability and the general difficulty demonstrated in tasks requiring binaural comparisons supports the idea that:
-
CIs best preserve ILD cues used for the head shadow effect
-
listeners likely extracted monaural loudness cues to complete the task
-
listening experience determines the ability to compute binaural cues
-
#
No conflict of interest has been declared by the author(s).