Search

Tongue shape can vary greatly for allophones of /r/ produced in different phonetic contexts but the primary acoustic cue used by listeners, lowered F3, remains stable. For the current study, it was hypothesized that auditory feedback maintains the speech motor control mechanisms that are constraining acoustic variability of F3 in /r/; thus the listener’s percept remains /r/ despite the range of articulatory configurations employed by the speaker. Given the potential importance of auditory feedback, postlingually deafened speakers should show larger acoustic variation in /r/ allophones than hearing controls, and auditory feedback from a cochlear implant could reduce that variation over time. To test these hypotheses, measures were made of phoneme perception and of production of tokens containing /r/, stop consonants, and /r/+stop clusters in hearing controls and in eight postlingually deafened adults pre- and postimplant. Postimplant, seven of the eight implant speakers did not differ from the control mean. It was also found that implant users’ production of stop and stop+/r/ blend improved with time but the measured acoustic contrast between these was still better in the control speakers than for the implant group even after the implant users had experienced a year of improved auditory feedback.

Purpose To describe cochlear implant users' phoneme labeling, discrimination, and prototypes for a vowel and a sibilant contrast, and to assess the effects of 1 year’s experience with prosthetic hearing. Method Based on naturally produced clear examples of “boot,” “beet,” “said,” and “shed” by 1 male and 1 female speaker, continua with 13 stimuli were synthesized for each contrast. Seven hearing controls labeled those stimuli and assigned them goodness ratings, as did 7 implant users at 1-month postimplant. One year later, these measures were repeated, and within category discrimination, d ′, was assessed. Results Compared with controls, implant users' vowel and sibilant labeling slopes were substantially shallower but improved over 1 year of prosthesis use. Their sensitivity to phonetic differences within phoneme categories was about half that of controls. The slopes of their goodness rating functions were shallower and did not improve. Their prototypes for the sibilant contrast (but not the vowels) were closer to one another and did not improve by moving apart. Conclusions Implant users' phoneme labeling and within-category perceptual structure were anomalous at 1-month postimplant. After 1 year of prosthesis use, phoneme labeling categories had sharpened but within category discrimination was well below that of hearing controls.

This study investigates covariation of perception and production of vowel contrasts in speakers who use cochlear implants and identification of those contrasts by listeners with normal hearing. Formant measures were made of seven vowel pairs whose members are neighboring in acoustic space. The vowels were produced in carrier phrases by 8 postlingually deafened adults, before and after they received their cochlear implants (CI). Improvements in a speaker's production and perception of a given vowel contrast and normally hearing listeners' identification of that contrast in masking noise tended to occur together. Specifically, speakers who produced vowel pairs with reduced contrast in the pre-CI condition (measured by separation in the acoustic vowel space) and who showed improvement in their perception of these contrasts post-CI (measured with a phoneme identification test) were found to have enhanced production contrasts post-CI in many cases. These enhanced production contrasts were associated, in turn, with enhanced masked word recognition, as measured from responses of a group of 10 normally hearing listeners. The results support the view that restoring self-hearing allows a speaker to adjust articulatory routines to ensure sufficient perceptual contrast for listeners.

According to a dual-process theory of the role of hearing in speech production, hearing helps maintain an internal model used by the speech control mechanism to achieve phonemic goals. It also monitors the acoustic environment and guides relatively rapid adjustments in postural parameters, such as those underlying average speech sound level and rate, in order to achieve suprasegmental goals that are a compromise between intelligibility and economy of effort. In order to obtain evidence bearing on this theory, acoustic and aerodynamic measures were collected from seven adventitiously deaf speakers who received cochlear implants, three speakers who had severe reduction in hearing following surgery for Neurofibromatosis-2, and one hard of hearing speaker. These speakers made recordings of the Rainbow Passage and an English vowel inventory before and after intervention. All but one of the postlingually deaf speakers who received prosthetic hearing reduced speech sound level, SPL. Three of these significantly increased a measure of inferred glottal aperture, H1-H2, and their session means for these two parameters were inversely correlated longitudinally. All but one of the speakers terminated respiratory limbs closer to functional residual capacity (FRC) once prosthetic hearing was supplied. Finally, the implant users' average values of air expenditure moved toward normative values with prosthetic hearing. These results are attributed to the mediation of changes in respiratory and glottal posture aimed at reducing speech sound level and economizing effort.

This study explores the effects of hearing status and bite blocks on vowel production. Normal-hearing controls and postlingually deaf adults read elicitation lists of ∕hVd∕ syllables with and without bite blocks and auditory feedback. Deaf participants’ auditory feedback was provided by a cochlear prosthesis and interrupted by switching off their implant microphones. Recording sessions were held before prosthesis was provided and one month and one year after. Long-term absence of auditory feedback was associated with heightened dispersion of vowel tokens, which was inflated further by inserting bite blocks. The restoration of some hearing with prosthesis reduced dispersion. Deaf speakers’ vowel spaces were reduced in size compared to controls. Insertion of bite blocks reduced them further because of the speakers’ incomplete compensation. A year of prosthesis use increased vowel contrast with feedback during elicitation. These findings support the inference that models of speech production must assign a role to auditory feedback in error-based correction of feedforward commands for subsequent articulatory gestures.

This study investigates the effects of speaking condition and auditory feedback on vowel production by postlingually deafened adults. Thirteen cochlear implant users produced repetitions of nine American English vowels prior to implantation, and at one month and one year after implantation. There were three speaking conditions (clear, normal, and fast), and two feedback conditions after implantation (implant processor turned on and off). Ten normal-hearing controls were also recorded once. Vowel contrasts in the formant space (expressed in mels) were larger in the clear than in the fast condition, both for controls and for implant users at all three time samples. Implant users also produced differences in duration between clear and fast conditions that were in the range of those obtained from the controls. In agreement with prior work, the implant users had contrast values lower than did the controls. The implant users' contrasts were larger with hearing on than off and improved from one month to one year postimplant. Because the controls and implant users responded similarly to a change in speaking condition, it is inferred that auditory feedback, although demonstrably important for maintaining normative values of vowel contrasts, is not needed to maintain the distinctiveness of those contrasts in different speaking conditions.