Sound Source Localization by Normal-Hearing Listeners, Hearing-Impaired Listeners and Cochlear Implant Listeners

Michael Dorman, Louise H. Loiselle, Sarah J. Cook, William Yost, René H. Gifford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Our primary aim was to determine whether listeners in the following patient groups achieve localization accuracy within the 95th percentile of accuracy shown by younger or older normal-hearing (NH) listeners: (1) hearing impaired with bilateral hearing aids, (2) bimodal cochlear implant (CI), (3) bilateral CI, (4) hearing preservation CI, (5) single-sided deaf CI and (6) combined bilateral CI and bilateral hearing preservation. Design: The listeners included 57 young NH listeners, 12 older NH listeners, 17 listeners fit with hearing aids, 8 bimodal CI listeners, 32 bilateral CI listeners, 8 hearing preservation CI listeners, 13 single-sided deaf CI listeners and 3 listeners with bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation. Sound source localization was assessed in a sound-deadened room with 13 loudspeakers arrayed in a 180-degree arc. Results: The root mean square (rms) error for the NH listeners was 6 degrees. The 95th percentile was 11 degrees. Nine of 16 listeners with bilateral hearing aids achieved scores within the 95th percentile of normal. Only 1 of 64 CI patients achieved a score within that range. Bimodal CI listeners scored at a level near chance, as did the listeners with a single CI or a single NH ear. Listeners with (1) bilateral CIs, (2) hearing preservation CIs, (3) single-sided deaf CIs and (4) both bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation, all showed rms error scores within a similar range (mean scores between 20 and 30 degrees of error). Conclusion: Modern CIs do not restore a normal level of sound source localization for CI listeners with access to sound information from two ears.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)127-131
Number of pages5
JournalAudiology and Neurotology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Apr 15 2016

Fingerprint

Sound Localization
Cochlear Implants
Hearing
Hearing Aids
Ear
Access to Information

Keywords

  • Cochlear implants
  • Sound source localization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Sensory Systems
  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Sound Source Localization by Normal-Hearing Listeners, Hearing-Impaired Listeners and Cochlear Implant Listeners. / Dorman, Michael; Loiselle, Louise H.; Cook, Sarah J.; Yost, William; Gifford, René H.

In: Audiology and Neurotology, 15.04.2016, p. 127-131.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dorman, Michael ; Loiselle, Louise H. ; Cook, Sarah J. ; Yost, William ; Gifford, René H. / Sound Source Localization by Normal-Hearing Listeners, Hearing-Impaired Listeners and Cochlear Implant Listeners. In: Audiology and Neurotology. 2016 ; pp. 127-131.
@article{cc369cfe040c474687b57d4385bb0ff7,
title = "Sound Source Localization by Normal-Hearing Listeners, Hearing-Impaired Listeners and Cochlear Implant Listeners",
abstract = "Objective: Our primary aim was to determine whether listeners in the following patient groups achieve localization accuracy within the 95th percentile of accuracy shown by younger or older normal-hearing (NH) listeners: (1) hearing impaired with bilateral hearing aids, (2) bimodal cochlear implant (CI), (3) bilateral CI, (4) hearing preservation CI, (5) single-sided deaf CI and (6) combined bilateral CI and bilateral hearing preservation. Design: The listeners included 57 young NH listeners, 12 older NH listeners, 17 listeners fit with hearing aids, 8 bimodal CI listeners, 32 bilateral CI listeners, 8 hearing preservation CI listeners, 13 single-sided deaf CI listeners and 3 listeners with bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation. Sound source localization was assessed in a sound-deadened room with 13 loudspeakers arrayed in a 180-degree arc. Results: The root mean square (rms) error for the NH listeners was 6 degrees. The 95th percentile was 11 degrees. Nine of 16 listeners with bilateral hearing aids achieved scores within the 95th percentile of normal. Only 1 of 64 CI patients achieved a score within that range. Bimodal CI listeners scored at a level near chance, as did the listeners with a single CI or a single NH ear. Listeners with (1) bilateral CIs, (2) hearing preservation CIs, (3) single-sided deaf CIs and (4) both bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation, all showed rms error scores within a similar range (mean scores between 20 and 30 degrees of error). Conclusion: Modern CIs do not restore a normal level of sound source localization for CI listeners with access to sound information from two ears.",
keywords = "Cochlear implants, Sound source localization",
author = "Michael Dorman and Loiselle, {Louise H.} and Cook, {Sarah J.} and William Yost and Gifford, {Ren{\'e} H.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1159/000444740",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "127--131",
journal = "Audiology and Neuro-Otology",
issn = "1420-3030",
publisher = "S. Karger AG",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sound Source Localization by Normal-Hearing Listeners, Hearing-Impaired Listeners and Cochlear Implant Listeners

AU - Dorman, Michael

AU - Loiselle, Louise H.

AU - Cook, Sarah J.

AU - Yost, William

AU - Gifford, René H.

PY - 2016/4/15

Y1 - 2016/4/15

N2 - Objective: Our primary aim was to determine whether listeners in the following patient groups achieve localization accuracy within the 95th percentile of accuracy shown by younger or older normal-hearing (NH) listeners: (1) hearing impaired with bilateral hearing aids, (2) bimodal cochlear implant (CI), (3) bilateral CI, (4) hearing preservation CI, (5) single-sided deaf CI and (6) combined bilateral CI and bilateral hearing preservation. Design: The listeners included 57 young NH listeners, 12 older NH listeners, 17 listeners fit with hearing aids, 8 bimodal CI listeners, 32 bilateral CI listeners, 8 hearing preservation CI listeners, 13 single-sided deaf CI listeners and 3 listeners with bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation. Sound source localization was assessed in a sound-deadened room with 13 loudspeakers arrayed in a 180-degree arc. Results: The root mean square (rms) error for the NH listeners was 6 degrees. The 95th percentile was 11 degrees. Nine of 16 listeners with bilateral hearing aids achieved scores within the 95th percentile of normal. Only 1 of 64 CI patients achieved a score within that range. Bimodal CI listeners scored at a level near chance, as did the listeners with a single CI or a single NH ear. Listeners with (1) bilateral CIs, (2) hearing preservation CIs, (3) single-sided deaf CIs and (4) both bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation, all showed rms error scores within a similar range (mean scores between 20 and 30 degrees of error). Conclusion: Modern CIs do not restore a normal level of sound source localization for CI listeners with access to sound information from two ears.

AB - Objective: Our primary aim was to determine whether listeners in the following patient groups achieve localization accuracy within the 95th percentile of accuracy shown by younger or older normal-hearing (NH) listeners: (1) hearing impaired with bilateral hearing aids, (2) bimodal cochlear implant (CI), (3) bilateral CI, (4) hearing preservation CI, (5) single-sided deaf CI and (6) combined bilateral CI and bilateral hearing preservation. Design: The listeners included 57 young NH listeners, 12 older NH listeners, 17 listeners fit with hearing aids, 8 bimodal CI listeners, 32 bilateral CI listeners, 8 hearing preservation CI listeners, 13 single-sided deaf CI listeners and 3 listeners with bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation. Sound source localization was assessed in a sound-deadened room with 13 loudspeakers arrayed in a 180-degree arc. Results: The root mean square (rms) error for the NH listeners was 6 degrees. The 95th percentile was 11 degrees. Nine of 16 listeners with bilateral hearing aids achieved scores within the 95th percentile of normal. Only 1 of 64 CI patients achieved a score within that range. Bimodal CI listeners scored at a level near chance, as did the listeners with a single CI or a single NH ear. Listeners with (1) bilateral CIs, (2) hearing preservation CIs, (3) single-sided deaf CIs and (4) both bilateral CIs and bilateral hearing preservation, all showed rms error scores within a similar range (mean scores between 20 and 30 degrees of error). Conclusion: Modern CIs do not restore a normal level of sound source localization for CI listeners with access to sound information from two ears.

KW - Cochlear implants

KW - Sound source localization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84963520612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84963520612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1159/000444740

DO - 10.1159/000444740

M3 - Article

C2 - 27077663

AN - SCOPUS:84963520612

SP - 127

EP - 131

JO - Audiology and Neuro-Otology

JF - Audiology and Neuro-Otology

SN - 1420-3030

ER -