Spatial Release from Masking with Simulated Electric–Acoustic and Cochlear Implant Speech

Background/Objectives: Spatial release from masking (SRM) refers to the improvement in speech understanding that occurs when a target talker is spatially separated from competing speech. Although normal-hearing (NH) listeners benefit substantially from spatially separating the maskers from the target, cochlear implant (CI) users experience markedly reduced advantages due to degraded spectral and binaural cue transmission. Electric–acoustic stimulation (EAS), which preserves low-frequency acoustic hearing in combination with electric stimulation, may partially restore these cues, but its benefits at small, conversationally relevant spatial separations remain poorly understood. Methods: This study measured speech identification thresholds using Coordinate Response Measure (CRM) sentences in NH listeners using natural, EAS, and simulated CI speech across five spatial configurations (0°, ±5°, ±10°, ±15°, ±30°). Speech identification thresholds were measured using a one-up/one-down adaptive procedure with Coordinate Response Measure (CRM) sentences. CI simulation used an eight-channel noise-band vocoder, whereas EAS simulation replaced the two lowest-frequency vocoder channels with low-pass speech (≤500 Hz). All stimuli were spatialized using head-related impulse responses generated from a validated virtual-acoustics model. Results: All stimulus types showed improved thresholds with increasing spatial separation; however, the magnitude of spatial release from masking (SRM) varied systematically. Natural speech produced the lowest thresholds and largest SRM, EAS speech yielded intermediate benefits, and simulated CI speech produced the smallest improvements. Notably, EAS and CI simulations were comparable at small separations, but EAS provided significantly greater SRM at ±15° and ±30°. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that even partial low-frequency acoustic preservation enhances SRM at moderate spatial separations, highlighting the importance of EAS configurations for improving spatial hearing in CI-related listening environments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Hearing and Balance Medicine
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ohbm7010015
Primary Topic
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spatial Release from Masking with Simulated Electric–Acoustic and Cochlear Implant Speech

Morgan Barkhouse, Bailey Borkowski, Nirmal Srinivasan, Chhayakanta Patro
Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Hearing and Balance Medicine
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
article

Spatial Release from Masking with Simulated Electric–Acoustic and Cochlear Implant Speech

Morgan Barkhouse, Bailey Borkowski, Nirmal Srinivasan, Chhayakanta Patro
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Spatial release from masking (SRM) refers to the improvement in speech understanding that occurs when a target talker is spatially separated from competing speech. Although normal-hearing (NH) listeners benefit substantially from spatially separating the maskers from the target, cochlear implant (CI) users experience markedly reduced advantages due to degraded spectral and binaural cue transmission. Electric–acoustic stimulation (EAS), which preserves low-frequency acoustic hearing in combination with electric stimulation, may partially restore these cues, but its benefits at small, conversationally relevant spatial separations remain poorly understood. Methods: This study measured speech identification thresholds using Coordinate Response Measure (CRM) sentences in NH listeners using natural, EAS, and simulated CI speech across five spatial configurations (0°, ±5°, ±10°, ±15°, ±30°). Speech identification thresholds were measured using a one-up/one-down adaptive procedure with Coordinate Response Measure (CRM) sentences. CI simulation used an eight-channel noise-band vocoder, whereas EAS simulation replaced the two lowest-frequency vocoder channels with low-pass speech (≤500 Hz). All stimuli were spatialized using head-related impulse responses generated from a validated virtual-acoustics model. Results: All stimulus types showed improved thresholds with increasing spatial separation; however, the magnitude of spatial release from masking (SRM) varied systematically. Natural speech produced the lowest thresholds and largest SRM, EAS speech yielded intermediate benefits, and simulated CI speech produced the smallest improvements. Notably, EAS and CI simulations were comparable at small separations, but EAS provided significantly greater SRM at ±15° and ±30°. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that even partial low-frequency acoustic preservation enhances SRM at moderate spatial separations, highlighting the importance of EAS configurations for improving spatial hearing in CI-related listening environments.

Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Hearing and Balance MedicineVol. 7(1)
Towson University (US)
Towson University
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.