Skip Navigation


Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education Advance Access originally published online on April 27, 2009
The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 2009 14(4):449-464; doi:10.1093/deafed/enp007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
14/4/449    most recent
enp007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Most, T.
Right arrow Articles by Aviner, C.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Most, T.
Right arrow Articles by Aviner, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Auditory, Visual, and Auditory–Visual Perception of Emotions by Individuals With Cochlear Implants, Hearing Aids, and Normal Hearing

Tova Most

Chen Aviner

Tel-Aviv University


  Abstract

This study evaluated the benefits of cochlear implant (CI) with regard to emotion perception of participants differing in their age of implantation, in comparison to hearing aid users and adolescents with normal hearing (NH). Emotion perception was examined by having the participants identify happiness, anger, surprise, sadness, fear, and disgust. The emotional content was placed upon the same neutral sentence. The stimuli were presented in auditory, visual, and combined auditory–visual modes. The results revealed better auditory identification by the participants with NH in comparison to all groups of participants with hearing loss (HL). No differences were found among the groups with HL in each of the 3 modes. Although auditory–visual perception was better than visual-only perception for the participants with NH, no such differentiation was found among the participants with HL. The results question the efficiency of some currently used CIs in providing the acoustic cues required to identify the speaker's emotional state.

Correspondence should be sent to Tova Most, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel (e-mail: tovam{at}post.tau.ac.il)

Received December 18, 2008; revised March 16, 2009; accepted March 20, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.