Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 377

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Music Perception with Temporal Cues in Acoustic and Electric Hearing

Kong, Ying-Yee, Cruz, Rachel, Jones, J. Ackland, Zeng, Fan-Gang·2004·Ear and Hearing

Abstract

In Brief Objective The first specific aim of the present study is to compare the ability of normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners to use temporal cues in three music perception tasks: tempo discrimination, rhythmic pattern identification, and melody identification. The second aim is to identify the relative contribution of temporal and spectral cues to melody recognition in acoustic and electric hearing. Design Both normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners participated in the experiments. Tempo discrimination was measured in a two-interval forced-choice procedure in which subjects were asked to choose the faster tempo at four standard tempo conditions (60, 80, 100, and 120 beats per minute). For rhythmic pattern identification, seven different rhythmic patterns were created and subjects were asked to read and choose the musical notation displayed on the screen that corresponded to the rhythmic pattern presented. Melody identification was evaluated with two sets of 12 familiar melodies. One set contained both rhythm and melody information (rhythm condition), whereas the other set contained only melody information (no-rhythm condition). Melody stimuli were also processed to extract the slowly varying temporal envelope from 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, and 64 frequency bands, to create cochlear implant simulations. Subjects listened to a melody and had to respond by choosing one of the 12 names corresponding to the melodies displayed on a computer screen. Results In tempo discrimination, the cochlear implant listeners performed similarly to the normal-hearing listeners with rate discrimination difference limens obtained at 4–6 beats per minute. In rhythmic pattern identification, the cochlear implant listeners performed 5–25 percentage points poorer than the normal-hearing listeners. The normal-hearing listeners achieved perfect scores in melody identification with and without the rhythmic cues. However, the cochlear implant listeners performed significantly poorer than the normal-hearing listeners in both rhythm and no-rhythm conditions. The simulation results from normal-hearing listeners showed a relatively high level of performance for all numbers of frequency bands in the rhythm condition but required as many as 32 bands in the no-rhythm condition. Conclusions Cochlear-implant listeners performed normally in tempo discrimination, but significantly poorer than normal-hearing listeners in rhythmic pattern identification and melody recognition. While both temporal (rhythmic) and spectral (pitch) cues contribute to melody recognition, cochlear-implant listeners mostly relied on the rhythmic cues for melody recognition. Without the rhythmic cues, high spectral resolution with as many as 32 bands was needed for melody recognition for normal-hearing listeners. This result indicates that the present cochlear implants provide sufficient spectral cues to support speech recognition in quiet, but they are not adequate to support music perception. Increasing the number of functional channels and improved encoding of the fine structure information are necessary to improve music perception for cochlear implant listeners. This study investigated the ability of normal-hearing (NH) and cochlear implant (CI) listeners to use rhythmic and pitch cues in music perception. Both NH and CI listeners participated in the study. In the tempo discrimination task, subjects were asked to choose the faster tempo in a two-interval, forced-choice procedure. In the rhythmic pattern identification task, they were asked to choose the musical notation that corresponded to the rhythmic pattern presented. Melody identification was evaluated with two sets of 12 familiar melodies with one set containing both rhythm and melody information (rhythm condition) and the other set only the melody information (no-rhythm condition). NH subjects were tested with the original and processed melodies that contained only temporal envelope cues from 1 to 64 bands. CI subjects were tested with the original and 1-band processed melodies. CI subjects performed normally in tempo discrimination, but significantly more poorly than the NH subjects in rhythmic pattern and melody identification tasks. Simulation results showed that 32 bands were needed for melody identification without rhythmic cues, which suggest that an increasing number of functional channels and improved encoding of fine structure information are necessary to improve music perception for CI 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.aud.0000120365.97792.2f

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 377

Metadata

Authors
Kong, Y.-Y., Cruz, R., Jones, J. A., & Zeng, F.-G.
Venue
Ear and Hearing
Published
2004-04
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
173-185
ISSN
0196-0202 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985970965
Cited by
377
References
29
FWCI
7.20
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: Music Perception with Temporal Cues in Acoustic and Electric Hearing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.aud.0000120365.97792.2f
The paper
Kong, Y.-Y., Cruz, R., Jones, J. A., & Zeng, F.-G. (2004). Music Perception with Temporal Cues in Acoustic and Electric Hearing. Ear and Hearing. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000120365.97792.2f

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.