↓ Skip to main content

Interaural Level Differences Do Not Suffice for Restoring Spatial Release from Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Listening

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interaural Level Differences Do Not Suffice for Restoring Spatial Release from Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Listening
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0045296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antje Ihlefeld, Ruth Y. Litovsky

Abstract

Spatial release from masking refers to a benefit for speech understanding. It occurs when a target talker and a masker talker are spatially separated. In those cases, speech intelligibility for target speech is typically higher than when both talkers are at the same location. In cochlear implant listeners, spatial release from masking is much reduced or absent compared with normal hearing listeners. Perhaps this reduced spatial release occurs because cochlear implant listeners cannot effectively attend to spatial cues. Three experiments examined factors that may interfere with deploying spatial attention to a target talker masked by another talker. To simulate cochlear implant listening, stimuli were vocoded with two unique features. First, we used 50-Hz low-pass filtered speech envelopes and noise carriers, strongly reducing the possibility of temporal pitch cues; second, co-modulation was imposed on target and masker utterances to enhance perceptual fusion between the two sources. Stimuli were presented over headphones. Experiments 1 and 2 presented high-fidelity spatial cues with unprocessed and vocoded speech. Experiment 3 maintained faithful long-term average interaural level differences but presented scrambled interaural time differences with vocoded speech. Results show a robust spatial release from masking in Experiments 1 and 2, and a greatly reduced spatial release in Experiment 3. Faithful long-term average interaural level differences were insufficient for producing spatial release from masking. This suggests that appropriate interaural time differences are necessary for restoring spatial release from masking, at least for a situation where there are few viable alternative segregation cues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Unknown 84 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 26%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 20 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 13%
Neuroscience 11 13%
Psychology 11 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 14 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2012.
All research outputs
#18,314,922
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,827
of 193,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,442
of 170,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,309
of 4,261 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 170,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,261 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.