PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Meisam K. Arjmandi AU - Hamzeh Ghasemzadeh AU - Laura C. Dilley TI - Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on voice quality distinction: Evidence from analysis of disordered voices AID - 10.1101/2020.06.29.20142885 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.06.29.20142885 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/10/2020.06.29.20142885.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/10/2020.06.29.20142885.full AB - The ability to discern variations in voice quality from speech is important for effective talker identification and robust speech processing; yet, little is known about how faithfully acoustic information relevant to variations in talkers’ voice quality is transmitted through a cochlear implant (CI) device. The present study analyzed unprocessed and CI-simulated versions of sustained /a/ vowel sounds from two groups of individuals with normal and disordered voice qualities in order to explore the effects of CI speech processing on acoustic information relevant for the distinction of voice quality. The CI-simulated voices were created by processing the vowel sounds along with 4-, 8-, 12-, 16-, 22-, and 32-channel noise-vocoders. The variations in voice quality for each voice sound was characterized by calculating mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs). The effects of simulated CI speech processing on the acoustic distinctiveness between normal and disordered voices were then measured by calculating the Mahalanobis distance (MD) metric, as well as accuracy of support vector machines (SVMs) applied to MFCC features. The results showed that CI speech processing, as simulated by noise vocoding, is highly detrimental to the acoustic information involved in conveying voice quality distinctions. This supports the view that listeners with CIs will likely experience difficulties in perceiving voice quality variations due to the reduced spectral resolution, shedding light on challenges listeners with CIs may face for effective recognition and processing of talkers’ voices.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was received for this study.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The data was from Voice Disorders Database model 4337, developed by Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI), Voice and Speech Lab.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe MEEI Voice Database is property of Kay Elemetrics Corporation and needs to be ordered through this company.