Weisenberger J M, Broadstone S M, Kozma-Spytek L
Central Institute for the Deaf, St. Louis, MO 63110.
J Rehabil Res Dev. 1991 Spring;28(2):45-56. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.1991.04.0045.
Although the results from a number of studies of the performance of multichannel tactile aids for speech perception have suggested that such devices might provide more benefit to hearing-impaired persons than single-channel tactile aids (3,4), recent studies involving direct comparisons of multichannel and single-channel vibrotactile aids (5,6) indicated otherwise. In fact, for some types of speech information, such as rhythm and stress perception, single-channel aids were shown to be superior. The present study attempted to address this apparent discrepancy by comparing the performance of two single-channel devices with two multichannel devices in a variety of speech perception tasks including both single-item and connected speech stimuli. Results indicated that the two classes of tactile device performed similarly in rhythm and stress perception, but that the multichannel aids in many cases showed better performance for tasks in which the identification of fine-structure phoneme information was required (both single-item and connected speech). Results are discussed in terms of the possibility that the performance of a specific multichannel tactile aid cannot be considered indicative of all devices of the same class.
尽管多项关于多通道触觉辅助设备用于语音感知性能的研究结果表明，此类设备可能比单通道触觉辅助设备能为听力受损者带来更多益处（3,4），但近期涉及多通道和单通道振动触觉辅助设备直接比较的研究（5,6）却得出了相反的结论。事实上，对于某些类型的语音信息，如节奏和重音感知，单通道辅助设备表现更优。本研究试图通过在包括单项目和连贯语音刺激在内的各种语音感知任务中，比较两种单通道设备和两种多通道设备的性能，来解决这一明显的差异。结果表明，这两类触觉设备在节奏和重音感知方面表现相似，但在许多情况下，多通道辅助设备在需要识别精细结构音素信息的任务（单项目和连贯语音）中表现更好。讨论结果时考虑了特定多通道触觉辅助设备的性能不能被视为同一类所有设备的代表这一可能性。
