Exam Preview

Auditory Evoked Potentials, Speech Perception and Temporal and Spectral Auditory Processing in Adults with CIs: Effects of Implant Experience and Auditory Training, presented in partnership with Seminars in Hearing

---

1.  Cortical auditory evoked potentials are never used to evaluate auditory plasticity correlate with speech perception in some studies of adult CI users need multichannel recordings that require 32 electrode placements or more in quiet and in noise elicit exactly the same responses, with the same latency and amplitude

2.  Research by Purdy and Kelly (2016) showed significant improvements in which auditory evoked potential measures over time after implantation middle latency response mismatch negativity N1 of the cortical auditory evoked potential P2 of the cortical auditory evoked potential

3.  Auditory training (AT) is being recognized as an important strategy for management for people with hearing loss. What statement about AT is correct? It is well established that AT should last for at least 6 weeks The intensity of AT for adequate training is well accepted The outcomes of all published AT studies cited show optimal results There are only 13 studies cited in a 2013 review and these include a wide variety of training materials, and duration and intensity of training with very mixed results.

4.  Speech perception in experienced CI users is associated with a number of auditory processing abilities. Which of these statements best summarizes this association? Spectral ripple noise discrimination is the only auditory perceptual skill necessary for speech perception Frequency discrimination, temporal modulated discrimination and iterated ripple noise correlate significantly with speech perception Gap detection is a temporal resolution task that is not linked to speech perception Temporal modulation transfer function (TMTF) task measures spectral resolution of modulations in the envelope of white noise

5.  Auditory training: is not readily available for postlingually deaf adults using cochlear implants has not been shown to improve outcomes for adult cochlear implant users can be defined as repeated exposure to auditory stimulation over time that promotes auditory plasticity is primarily designed to reduce variability in outcomes for adult cochlear implant users

6.  Auditory evoked potentials recorded in people using cochlear implants can be affected by stimulus artefact. This artefact is made worse by: using short duration stimuli placing the reference recording electrode on the earlobe or mastoid on the cochlear implant side using a contralateral reference electrode following good evoked potential practice and ensuring low and balanced impedances for recording electrodes placed on the scalp

7.  The Lexical Neighborhood Test (LNT) uses monosyllabic words and multisyllabic words (MLNT) words to assess speech perception for words for many lexical neighbors (hard words) or few lexical neighbors (easy words). LNT and MLNT word scores: are sensitive to the effects of auditory training do not show good reliability when test and retest baseline scores are compared do not differ for easy versus hard words show a "ceiling" effect (near maximum scores) for postlingually deafened adults using cochlear implants

8.  Mismatch negativity may not be clinically useful for objectively measuring auditory plasticity in cochlear implant users because: there are no improvements in mismatch negativity over time the majority of cochlear implant users do not have a mismatch negativity although mismatch negativity shows changes with cochlear implant experience, there is considerable inter-subject variability mismatch negativity can only be recorded with complex stimuli

9.  Researchers are keen to establish links between evoked potential and behavioral measures in users of cochlear implants in order to have an objective predictor of performance. The following factors have made this difficult: Methodological differences, such as differences in stimuli, across studies have contributed to different outcomes Results will differ depending on which recording electrode is used, which stimulus, and the amount of auditory experience and training a person has had with their cochlear implant Measures such as cortical evoked potential P2 area look promising but are typically not been reported in the literature All of the above

10.  In the future auditory training studies in should: Use less intensive training Ignore the effects of cognitive skills such as memory and attention Examine links between spectral resolution, speech perception, and cortical auditory evoked potentials Not include long-term follow-up to check for maintenance of improvements