Emotion and Word Recognition for Unprocessed and Vocoded Speech Stimuli.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES\nIndividuals with cochlear implants (CIs) show reduced word and auditory emotion recognition abilities relative to their peers with normal hearing. Modern CI processing strategies are designed to preserve acoustic cues requisite for word recognition rather than those cues required for accessing other signal information (e.g., talker gender or emotional state). While word recognition is undoubtedly important for communication, the inaccessibility of this additional signal information in speech may lead to negative social experiences and outcomes for individuals with hearing loss. This study aimed to evaluate whether the emphasis on word recognition preservation in CI processing has unintended consequences on the perception of other talker information, such as emotional state.\n\n\nDESIGN\nTwenty-four young adult listeners with normal hearing listened to sentences and either reported a target word in each sentence (word recognition task) or selected the emotion of the talker (emotion recognition task) from a list of options (Angry, Calm, Happy, and Sad). Sentences were blocked by task type (emotion recognition versus word recognition) and processing condition (unprocessed versus 8-channel noise vocoder) and presented randomly within the block at three signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) in a background of speech-shaped noise. Confusion matrices showed the number of errors in emotion recognition by listeners.\n\n\nRESULTS\nListeners demonstrated better emotion recognition performance than word recognition performance at the same SNR. Unprocessed speech resulted in higher recognition rates than vocoded stimuli. Recognition performance (for both words and emotions) decreased with worsening SNR. Vocoding speech resulted in a greater negative impact on emotion recognition than it did for word recognition.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThese data confirm prior work that suggests that in background noise, emotional prosodic information in speech is easier to recognize than word information, even after simulated CI processing. However, emotion recognition may be more negatively impacted by background noise and CI processing than word recognition. Future work could explore CI processing strategies that better encode prosodic information and investigate this effect in individuals with CIs as opposed to vocoded simulation. This study emphasized the need for clinicians to consider not only word recognition but also other aspects of speech that are critical to successful social communication.