ArticleTrends in hearing
Spectrotemporal Modulation Sensitivity in Cochlear-Implant and Normal-Hearing Listeners: Is the Performance Driven by Temporal or Spectral Modulation Sensitivity?
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship Between Age, Auditory Performance, and Quality of Life in Middle-Aged and Older Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2026Article
- Beyond speech perception: contemporary landscape of language agnostic hearing assessment.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Habilitation beyond the Bionic Metaphor: Producing Deafnesses of the Future.Science, technology & human values · 2025Article
- Hearing Sensitivity to Gliding Rippled Spectra in Hearing-Impaired Listeners.Audiology research · 2024Article
- Article
- Using Auditory Characteristics to Select Hearing Aid Compression Speeds for Presbycusic Patients.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Relationship Between the Ability to Detect Frequency Changes or Temporal Gaps and Speech Perception Performance in Post-lingual Cochlear Implant Users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Reaction Time Sensitivity to Spectrotemporal Modulations of Sound.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study examined the contribution of temporal and spectral modulation sensitivity to discrimination of stimuli modulated in both the time and frequency domains. The spectrotemporally modulated stimuli contained spectral ripples that shifted systematically across frequency over time at a repetition rate of 5 Hz. As the ripple density increased in the stimulus, modulation depth of the 5 Hz amplitude modulation (AM) reduced. Spectrotemporal modulation discrimination was compared with subjects' ability to discriminate static spectral ripples and the ability to detect slow AM. The general pattern from both the cochlear implant (CI) and normal hearing groups showed that spectrotemporal modulation thresholds were correlated more strongly with AM detection than with static ripple discrimination. CI subjects' spectrotemporal modulation thresholds were also highly correlated with speech recognition in noise, when partialing out static ripple discrimination, but the correlation was not significant when partialing out AM detection. The results indicated that temporal information was more heavily weighted in spectrotemporal modulation discrimination, and for CI subjects, it was AM sensitivity that drove the correlation between spectrotemporal modulation thresholds and speech recognition. The results suggest that for the rates tested here, temporal information processing may limit performance more than spectral information processing in both CI users and normal hearing listeners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.