The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Speech Recognition as a Function of the Number of Electrodes Used in the SPEAK Cochlear Implant Speech Processor
Abstract
Speech recognition was measured in listeners with the Nucleus-22 SPEAK speech processing strategy as a function of the number of electrodes. Speech stimuli were analyzed into 20 frequency bands and processed according to the usual SPEAK processing strategy. In the normal clinical processor each electrode is assigned to represent the output of one filter. To create reduced-electrode processors the output of several adjacent filters were directed to a single electrode, resulting in processors with 1, 2, 4, 7, 10, and 20 electrodes. The overall spectral bandwidth was preserved, but the number of active electrodes was progressively reduced. After a 2-day period of adjustment to each processor, speech recognition performance was measured on medial consonants, vowels, monosyllabic words, and sentences. Performance with a single electrode processor was poor in all listeners, and average performance increased dramatically on all test materials as the number of electrodes was increased from 1 to 4. No differences in average performance were observed on any test in the 7-, 10-, and 20-electrode conditions. On sentence and consonant tests there was no difference between average performance with the 4-electrode and 20-electrode processors. This pattern of results suggests that cochlear implant listeners are not able to make full use of the spectral information on all 20 electrodes. Further research is necessary to understand the reasons for this limitation and to understand how to increase the amount of spectral information in speech received by implanted listeners.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Friesen, L. M., Shannon, R. V., Baskent, D., & Wang, X. (2001) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1381538 · Cited by 1,049
Self-citationCochlear Implants: System Design, Integration, and Evaluation
Zeng, F.-G., Rebscher, S., Harrison, W., Sun, X., & Feng, H. (2008) · IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/rbme.2008.2008250 · Cited by 878
Combining acoustic and electrical hearing
Gantz, B. J., & Turner, C. W. (2003) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1097/00005537-200310000-00012 · Cited by 377
The functional performance of the Argus II retinal prosthesis
Stronks, H. C., & Dagnelie, G. (2014) · Expert Review of Medical Devices · doi:10.1586/17434440.2014.862494 · Cited by 189
Cochlear-implant spatial selectivity with monopolar, bipolar and tripolar stimulation
Zhu, Z., Tang, Q., Zeng, F.-G., Guan, T., & Ye, D. (2012) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2011.11.005 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Fishman, K. E., Shannon, R. V., & Slattery, W. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Published
- 1997-10
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1201-1215
- ISSN
- 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9102
- OpenAlex
- W2091572759
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Speech Recognition as a Function of the Number of Electrodes Used in the SPEAK Cochlear Implant Speech Processor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1044/jslhr.4005.1201
- The paper
- Fishman, K. E., Shannon, R. V., & Slattery, W. H. (1997). Speech Recognition as a Function of the Number of Electrodes Used in the SPEAK Cochlear Implant Speech Processor. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. https://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4005.1201
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.