Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11(07): 390-406
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748126
Original Article

Musical Backgrounds, Listening Habits, and Aesthetic Enjoyment of Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients

Kate Gfeller
School of Music, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
Department of Speech Language Pathology and Audiology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
Department of Otolaryngology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
,
Aaron Christ
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
,
John F. Knutson
Department of Psychology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
,
Shelley Witt
Department of Otolaryngology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
,
Kathleen T. Murray
Department of Psychology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
,
Richard S. Tyler
Department of Otolaryngology, University of lowa, lowa City, lowa
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This paper describes the listening habits and musical enjoyment of postlingually deafened adults who use cochlear implants. Sixty-five implant recipients (35 females, 30 males) participated in a survey containing questions about musical background, prior involvement in music, and audiologic success with the implant in various listening circumstances. Responses were correlated with measures of cognition and speech recognition. Sixty-seven implant recipients completed daily diaries (7 consecutive days) in which they reported hours spent in specific music activities. Results indicate a wide range of success with music. In general, people enjoy music less postimplantation than prior to hearing loss. Musical enjoyment is influenced by the listening environment (e.g., a quiet room) and features of the music.

Abbreviations: HIGH = high school, POST = adult education, PRIM = primary school, SCT = Sequence Completion Test, SE = standard error, TERT = tertiary, VMT = Visual Monitoring Task, VMT1 = Visual Monitoring Task one per second rate, VMT2 = Visual Monitoring Task two per second rate.

Key Words

Cochlear implants - listening habits - music enjoyment - timbre


Publication History

Article published online:
12 April 2022

© 2000. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • AgrestiA. (1990). Categorical Data Analysis. New York: Wiley, 322–324.
  • Dorman M, Basham K, McCandless G, Dove H. (1991). Speech understanding and music appreciation with the Ineraid cochlear implant. Hear J 44:32–37.
  • Gfeller K. (1996). Appreciating music with the implant. CONTACT 11(2):36–37.
  • Gfeller K. (1998). Music appreciation from the perspective of implant recipients. CONTACT 12(3):24–25.
  • Gfeller K, Lansing C. (1991). Melodic, rhythmic, and tim-bral perception of adult cochlear implant users. J Speech Hear Res 34:916–920.
  • Gfeller K, Lansing C. (1992). Musical perception of cochlear implant users as measured by the Primary Measures of Music Audiation: an item analysis. J Music Ther 29(l):18–39.
  • Gfeller KE, Hanson-Abromeit D, Knutson J, Witt S. (1996a, November). The Development of a Popular Music Appraisal Battery for Cochlear Implant Recipients. Poster presented at the National Association for Music Therapy, Nashville, Tennessee.
  • Gfeller K, Knutson JF, Woodworth G, Witt S, DeBus B. (1998a). Timbral recognition and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users and normal-hearing adults. J Am Acad Audiol 9:1–19.
  • Gfeller K, Witt S, Knutson J, Coffman D, Woodworth G. (1996b, April). The Effects of Familiarity and Complexity on Music Perception of Cochlear Implant Recipients. Poster presented at the Music Educators National Conference, Kansas City, MO.
  • Gfeller K, Woodworth G, Robin D, Witt S, Knutson JF. (1997). Perception of rhythmic and sequential patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 18:252–260.
  • Gfeller KE, Witt S, Kim KH, Knutson J. (1998b). The Iowa Music Perception and Appraisal Battery. Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa Hospitals, Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery.
  • Hoffer C. (1992). Sociology and music education. In: Colwell R, ed. Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning. New York: Schirmer, 713–723.
  • Knutson JF, Hinrichs JV, Tyler RS, Gantz BJ, Schartz HA, Woodworth G. (1991). Psychological predictors of audiological outcomes of multichannel cochlear implants: preliminary findings. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 100: 817–822.
  • Pijl S. (1997). Labeling of musical interval size by cochlear implant patients and normally hearing subjects. Ear Hear 18:364–372.
  • Pratt RL, Doak PE. (1976). A subjective rating scale for timbre. J Sound Vibration 45:317–328.
  • Simon HA, Kotovsky K. (1963). Human acquisition of concepts for sequential patterns. Psychol Rev 70:543–546.
  • Tillman TW, Carhart R. (1966). An Expanded Test for Speech Discrimination Utilizing CNC Monosyllabic Words: Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. Technical Report No. SAM-TR-66–55. Brooks Air Force Base, TX: USAF School of Aerospace Medicine.
  • Tye-Murray N, Knutson JF, Lemke JH. (1993). Assessments of communication strategies use: questionnaires and daily diaries Semin Hear 14:338–353.
  • Tyler RS, Preece JP, Tye-Murray N. (1986). Iowa Phoneme and Sentence Test [laser video disc]. Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa, Department of Otolaryngology.
  • Tyler RS, Summerfield AQ. (1996). Cochlear implantation: relationships with research on auditory deprivation and acclimatization. Ear Hear 17:38S-50S.
  • Von Bismarck G. (1974). Timbre of steady sounds: a factorial investigation of its verbal attributes. Acustica 30: 146–172.