• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

正常听力成年人与成年人工耳蜗使用者对节奏性和连续性音高模式的感知。

Perception of rhythmic and sequential pitch patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users.

作者信息

Gfeller K, Woodworth G, Robin D A, Witt S, Knutson J F

机构信息

School of Music, University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA.

出版信息

Ear Hear. 1997 Jun;18(3):252-60. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199706000-00008.

DOI:10.1097/00003446-199706000-00008
PMID:9201460
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the musical perception of 17 adult recipients of the Nucleus cochlear implant using two different formant extraction processing strategies (F0F1F2 and MPEAK).

DESIGN

Over a 12 mo period, participants were alternately switched between two strategies every 3 mo. Performance was evaluated using three measures of rhythmic and sequential pitch perception.

RESULTS

Three individuals performed significantly better with the MPEAK strategy on one particular rhythm task, 11 participants performed better with the MPEAK strategy on another rhythm task, and no significant differences were found between the two strategies on a sequential pitch pattern task.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither strategy seems clearly superior for perception of either sequential pitch or rhythmic patterns.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了17名使用两种不同共振峰提取处理策略(F0F1F2和MPEAK)的成人人工耳蜗植入者的音乐感知能力。

设计

在12个月的时间里,参与者每3个月交替使用两种策略。使用三种节奏和顺序音高感知测量方法评估表现。

结果

三名个体在一项特定节奏任务中使用MPEAK策略时表现明显更好,11名参与者在另一项节奏任务中使用MPEAK策略时表现更好,而在顺序音高模式任务中两种策略之间未发现显著差异。

结论

对于顺序音高或节奏模式的感知,两种策略似乎都没有明显优势。

相似文献

1
Perception of rhythmic and sequential pitch patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users.正常听力成年人与成年人工耳蜗使用者对节奏性和连续性音高模式的感知。
Ear Hear. 1997 Jun;18(3):252-60. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199706000-00008.
2
Music and lexical tone perception in Chinese adult cochlear implant users.中文人工耳蜗使用者的音乐和声调感知。
Laryngoscope. 2012 Jun;122(6):1353-60. doi: 10.1002/lary.23271. Epub 2012 Feb 23.
3
Music perception in adult cochlear implant recipients.成人人工耳蜗植入受者的音乐感知
Acta Otolaryngol. 2003 Sep;123(7):826-35. doi: 10.1080/00016480310000386.
4
Identification of speech by cochlear implant recipients with the Multipeak (MPEAK) and Spectral Peak (SPEAK) speech coding strategies. I. Vowels.使用多峰(MPEAK)和频谱峰(SPEAK)语音编码策略的人工耳蜗植入受者对语音的识别。I. 元音。
Ear Hear. 1996 Jun;17(3):182-97. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199606000-00002.
5
Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients on pitch perception, melody recognition, and speech reception in noise.人工耳蜗植入者在音高感知、旋律识别及噪声环境下言语接收方面的准确性。
Ear Hear. 2007 Jun;28(3):412-23. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3180479318.
6
[Evaluation of rhythmic and timbral perception by normal-hearing and postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant users].[正常听力及语后聋成年人工耳蜗使用者的节奏和音色感知评估]
Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2012 Jun;47(6):493-5.
7
Musical Sound Quality in Cochlear Implant Users: A Comparison in Bass Frequency Perception Between Fine Structure Processing and High-Definition Continuous Interleaved Sampling Strategies.人工耳蜗使用者的音乐音质:精细结构处理与高清连续交错采样策略在低频感知方面的比较。
Ear Hear. 2015 Sep-Oct;36(5):582-90. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000170.
8
Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users.人工耳蜗使用者与助听器使用者的音乐感知比较。
Ear Hear. 2008 Jun;29(3):421-34. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31816a0d0b.
9
A within-subject comparison of adult patients using the Nucleus F0F1F2 and F0F1F2B3B4B5 speech processing strategies.
J Speech Hear Res. 1996 Apr;39(2):261-77. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3902.261.
10
Temporal Fine Structure Processing, Pitch, and Speech Perception in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.成人人工耳蜗植入者的时间精细结构处理、音高与言语感知
Ear Hear. 2018 Jul/Aug;39(4):679-686. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000525.

引用本文的文献

1
Investigating Hemodynamic Patterns During Beat Processing in Cochlear Implant Users: Insights from a Finger Tapping Study.人工耳蜗使用者节拍处理过程中的血流动力学模式研究:来自一项手指敲击研究的见解
Audit Percept Cogn. 2025;8(2):132-156. doi: 10.1080/25742442.2025.2510182. Epub 2025 Jun 3.
2
Temporal Cues in the Judgment of Music Emotion for Normal and Cochlear Implant Listeners.正常听力者和人工耳蜗植入者对音乐情绪判断的时间线索。
Trends Hear. 2023 Jan-Dec;27:23312165231170501. doi: 10.1177/23312165231170501.
3
Music Perception Abilities of the Hearing Amplification System Users.
听力放大系统使用者的音乐感知能力。
J Audiol Otol. 2023 Apr;27(2):78-87. doi: 10.7874/jao.2022.00367. Epub 2023 Mar 13.
4
Optimization of Sound Coding Strategies to Make Singing Music More Accessible for Cochlear Implant Users.优化声音编码策略,使植入人工耳蜗的用户更易于欣赏歌唱音乐。
Trends Hear. 2023 Jan-Dec;27:23312165221148022. doi: 10.1177/23312165221148022.
5
Assessment of music experience after cochlear implantation: A review of current tools and their utilization.人工耳蜗植入后音乐体验的评估:当前工具及其应用综述
World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021 Apr 3;7(2):116-125. doi: 10.1016/j.wjorl.2021.02.003. eCollection 2021 Apr.
6
Bimodal Benefit for Music Perception: Effect of Acoustic Bandwidth.音乐感知的双峰获益:带宽的影响。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021 Apr 14;64(4):1341-1353. doi: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00390. Epub 2021 Mar 30.
7
An evaluation framework for research platforms to advance cochlear implant/hearing aid technology: A case study with CCi-MOBILE.用于推进人工耳蜗/助听器技术的研究平台评估框架:以 CCi-MOBILE 为例的研究
J Acoust Soc Am. 2021 Jan;149(1):229. doi: 10.1121/10.0002989.
8
Are There Real-world Benefits to Bimodal Listening?双模式听力是否有实际获益?
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Oct;41(9):e1111-e1117. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002767.
9
A Neurophysiological Study of Musical Pitch Identification in Mandarin-Speaking Cochlear Implant Users.一项针对说普通话的人工耳蜗使用者音乐音高识别的神经生理学研究。
Neural Plast. 2020 Jul 22;2020:4576729. doi: 10.1155/2020/4576729. eCollection 2020.
10
Musical Emotion Perception in Bimodal Patients: Relative Weighting of Musical Mode and Tempo Cues.双模式患者的音乐情感感知:音乐模式和节奏线索的相对权重
Front Neurosci. 2020 Feb 26;14:114. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.00114. eCollection 2020.