Limits...
Normal-Hearing Listeners ’ and Cochlear Implant Users ’ Perception of Pitch Cues in Emotional Speech

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

In cochlear implants (CIs), acoustic speech cues, especially for pitch, are delivered in a degraded form. This study’s aim is to assess whether due to degraded pitch cues, normal-hearing listeners and CI users employ different perceptual strategies to recognize vocal emotions, and, if so, how these differ. Voice actors were recorded pronouncing a nonce word in four different emotions: anger, sadness, joy, and relief. These recordings’ pitch cues were phonetically analyzed. The recordings were used to test 20 normal-hearing listeners’ and 20 CI users’ emotion recognition. In congruence with previous studies, high-arousal emotions had a higher mean pitch, wider pitch range, and more dominant pitches than low-arousal emotions. Regarding pitch, speakers did not differentiate emotions based on valence but on arousal. Normal-hearing listeners outperformed CI users in emotion recognition, even when presented with CI simulated stimuli. However, only normal-hearing listeners recognized one particular actor’s emotions worse than the other actors’. The groups behaved differently when presented with similar input, showing that they had to employ differing strategies. Considering the respective speaker’s deviating pronunciation, it appears that for normal-hearing listeners, mean pitch is a more salient cue than pitch range, whereas CI users are biased toward pitch range cues.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Percentage of correctly identified emotions per condition (normal acoustic stimuli on the left, CI simulations on the right).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5016815&req=5

fig5-0301006615599139: Percentage of correctly identified emotions per condition (normal acoustic stimuli on the left, CI simulations on the right).

Mentions: Mean pitch (Bark)—per emotion and with high arousal, low arousal, positive valence, and negative valence indicated; the error bars denote one standard error for this figure and for figures 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.


Normal-Hearing Listeners ’ and Cochlear Implant Users ’ Perception of Pitch Cues in Emotional Speech
Percentage of correctly identified emotions per condition (normal acoustic stimuli on the left, CI simulations on the right).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5016815&req=5

fig5-0301006615599139: Percentage of correctly identified emotions per condition (normal acoustic stimuli on the left, CI simulations on the right).
Mentions: Mean pitch (Bark)—per emotion and with high arousal, low arousal, positive valence, and negative valence indicated; the error bars denote one standard error for this figure and for figures 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

In cochlear implants (CIs), acoustic speech cues, especially for pitch, are delivered in a degraded form. This study’s aim is to assess whether due to degraded pitch cues, normal-hearing listeners and CI users employ different perceptual strategies to recognize vocal emotions, and, if so, how these differ. Voice actors were recorded pronouncing a nonce word in four different emotions: anger, sadness, joy, and relief. These recordings’ pitch cues were phonetically analyzed. The recordings were used to test 20 normal-hearing listeners’ and 20 CI users’ emotion recognition. In congruence with previous studies, high-arousal emotions had a higher mean pitch, wider pitch range, and more dominant pitches than low-arousal emotions. Regarding pitch, speakers did not differentiate emotions based on valence but on arousal. Normal-hearing listeners outperformed CI users in emotion recognition, even when presented with CI simulated stimuli. However, only normal-hearing listeners recognized one particular actor’s emotions worse than the other actors’. The groups behaved differently when presented with similar input, showing that they had to employ differing strategies. Considering the respective speaker’s deviating pronunciation, it appears that for normal-hearing listeners, mean pitch is a more salient cue than pitch range, whereas CI users are biased toward pitch range cues.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus