Comparing CI with HA's

shel90 said:
Quote:
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis primarily dealt with the way that language affects thought. Also sometimes called the Whorfian hypothesis, this theory claims that the language a person speaks affects the way that he or she thinks, meaning that the structure of the language itself affects cognition


I have a few students in my class (I teach 1st grade) who have no use of their CIs and dont have language since they just started learning ASL so now I can believe why their ability to pick up on language whether it is either ASL or English in print is severly delayed if the Whorfian hypostesis is true about how the structure of the language itself affect congnition . Now I can keep that in mind whenever my student struggle to remember their vocabulary with ASL and English.

Yes, those students got their CIs prelingually. It seems the CI is not working for them so their parents had them sent to my school knowing that they need ASL to develop language. I just hope it is not too late. :(
Click to expand...

That is why I want parents to learn sign just in case. CIs are very useful but the outcome and success is variable with them so I want all bases covered.

I keep thinking of that grandfather who's a friend of my parents who has a deaf grandson. He says he doesn't speak well despite being implanted when he was very young. I wonder if he has good language skills or if he knows sign.
 
shel90 said:
no theories I am looking for ...just wondering if CIs can help with discriminating speech sounds especially the ones that are similiar like the s's and t's.

With my HA, I can discriminate a few speech sounds like the vowels but when it comes to some consonants..impossible. I remember so many hours with my speech teacher trying to learn how to discriminate those sounds. Now, I understand that is it just impossible with my 120 dB hearing loss and why didnt my speech therapist who studied speech and deafness know that? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Oh, I got it. Don't know much about it, but do know that the dB level needed to perceive a certain frequency auditorily has to do with the physics involved in actually producing the sound wave. Like, the amount of air pressure necessary to create an "s" sound that can be perceived at say 30bB is less than the amount of air pressure needed to produce a sound that is perceived at 80dB.
 
Speech-banana

SpeechBanana.gif


audiogram.gif
 
deafskeptic said:
That is why I want parents to learn sign just in case. CIs are very useful but the outcome and success is variable with them so I want all bases covered.

I keep thinking of that grandfather who's a friend of my parents who has a deaf grandson. He says he doesn't speak well despite being implanted when he was very young. I wonder if he has good language skills or if he knows sign.
Click to expand...

I have the same beliefs as u do but doctors and parents have more power over my opinions. They say that we are biased cuz we want to keep our school open. They wont listen to us so it is the children who dont benefit from the CIs that suffer the consequences. It is sad. That's why I applaud and admire the parents who still want themselves and their child learn ASL. We have a few parents like that and they seem more involved in their child's education than the parents who chose the oral-only approach. I am starting to notice that more and more at my work.

Not to say that all parents who chose the oral approach are not involved in their child's education. My mom chose the only oral approach for my brother (b4 my brother was referred to the deaf school) and I and she was very involved in our education, even fighting for our rights. I feel so lucky and I think that was one of the contributing factors to why I was able to perform on age appropriate levels in academics.
 
shel90 said:
I have the same beliefs as u do but doctors and parents have more power over my opinions. They say that we are biased cuz we want to keep our school open. They wont listen to us so it is the children who dont benefit from the CIs that suffer the consequences. It is sad. That's why I applaud and admire the parents who still want themselves and their child learn ASL. We have a few parents like that and they seem more involved in their child's education than the parents who chose the oral-only approach. I am starting to notice that more and more at my work.

Not to say that all parents who chose the oral approach are not involved in their child's education. My mom chose the only oral approach for my brother (b4 my brother was referred to the deaf school) and I and she was very involved in our education, even fighting for our rights. I feel so lucky and I think that was one of the contributing factors to why I was able to perform on age appropriate levels in academics.
Click to expand...
Involvement of parents is CRUCIAL !!

And these (involved) parents will see the need for communication. If speech doesn't work, these parents will find other alternatives. Sign...
These parents will also be the ones that acknowledge the fact that the child is deaf. My guess is that when the parent does not feel so, the communication-problems are easier ridiculed. (Like blaming it on behaviour problems instead of lack of communication.)
 
jillio said:
........Don't know much about it, but do know that the dB level needed to perceive a certain frequency auditorily has to do with the physics involved in actually producing the sound wave. Like, the amount of air pressure necessary to create an "s" sound that can be perceived at say 30bB is less than the amount of air pressure needed to produce a sound that is perceived at 80dB.
Click to expand...
Have a look here...

30dB: Pressure 0.000632456 Pascal, intensity 1e-9 W/m2
80dB: Pressure 0.2 Pascal, intensity 1e-4 W/m2
A factor 1e5 !! (or 100.000)
 
Actually, I think what people hear with CI is probaly all along a spectrum.
Like I think in some cases, a CI is essentailly like glasses for near or farsighted people. A lot of near and farsighted people cannot see without glasses, but they then put their glasses on and they can see pretty much normally. However, with others it probaly gives different sound quality. Like the way my friend who is legally blind, can wear glasses, and they give him SOME sight....but not really what a sighted person thinks of as sight.
And yes, I know I don't use a CI......but I have heard demonstrations of what an implantee hears.(there was an exhibition at the Science Museam) It's better then hearing aids, yes.... and it's a decent approximentation. BUT,there's still a lot of stuff missing. It's still very ......not as fleshed out as what hearing people hear.
and I was talking more of sound quality. Not nessarily dcb functioning. Like
I think right now what CId people hear, is more '80's cassettes sound quality. Pretty good......but still not as good as what a hearing person hears.(that would be more MP.3 quality) All the sites I've seen have said that the sound quality varies signficently for different people. I know a lot of people who are "almost hearing" with hearing aids....so there are some people who are almost hearing with CI. That doesn't mean that EVERYONE is "almost hearing" with CI. As I said before a CI gives a SPECTRUM of sound quality to different people. That's all.......and I actually do know what hearing people hear.
After I had atresia repair (born without ear canals) I could hear normally for a short while..........and it was DEFINTLY different from the way I heard, pre surgery and the way others hear via hearing aids or CIs.....matter of fact, I seem to recall that Lilysdad, said something about how the CI couldn't replicate bass sounds yet.
 
deafdyke said:
Actually, I think what people hear with CI is probaly all along a spectrum.
Like I think in some cases, a CI is essentailly like glasses for near or farsighted people. A lot of near and farsighted people cannot see without glasses, but they then put their glasses on and they can see pretty much normally. However, with others it probaly gives different sound quality. Like the way my friend who is legally blind, can wear glasses, and they give him SOME sight....but not really what a sighted person thinks of as sight.
And yes, I know I don't use a CI......but I have heard demonstrations of what an implantee hears.(there was an exhibition at the Science Museam) It's better then hearing aids, yes.... and it's a decent approximentation. BUT,there's still a lot of stuff missing. It's still very ......not as fleshed out as what hearing people hear.
and I was talking more of sound quality. Not nessarily dcb functioning. Like
I think right now what CId people hear, is more '80's cassettes sound quality. Pretty good......but still not as good as what a hearing person hears.(that would be more MP.3 quality) All the sites I've seen have said that the sound quality varies signficently for different people. I know a lot of people who are "almost hearing" with hearing aids....so there are some people who are almost hearing with CI. That doesn't mean that EVERYONE is "almost hearing" with CI. As I said before a CI gives a SPECTRUM of sound quality to different people. That's all.......and I actually do know what hearing people hear.
After I had atresia repair (born without ear canals) I could hear normally for a short while..........and it was DEFINTLY different from the way I heard, pre surgery and the way others hear via hearing aids or CIs.....matter of fact, I seem to recall that Lilysdad, said something about how the CI couldn't replicate bass sounds yet.
Click to expand...

DeafDyke, again, you do NOT have a CI. You have NO idea. Please don't tell us CIers how we hear with them.
 
This is a good thread and I appreciate the input from the knowledgeable people who experienced CI first-hand! I'm not going to pretend that I know everything about the differences between a HA and CI and I rather just lurk in here with an open mind and learn all I can, especially with my dear grandson about to undergo a second CI surgery next month. I really appreciate all the first-hand experiences and information straight from the horse's mouth so to speak.
 
LuciaDisturbed said:
DeafDyke, again, you do NOT have a CI. You have NO idea. Please don't tell us CIers how we hear with them.
Click to expand...

AMEN! Until one actually has one and heard with it...there is no way to accurately describe how it sounds.

DD - you got a bee in your bonnet with how people hear with CIs. Yes, there is a transitioning period getting used to it. After a while it sounds quite natural and I hear more than I ever did with my HA. The main difference (there are other milder differences) is in the range of sound one can hear. One can't hear the lowest of the low sounds (200hz or lower) and frequencies higher than about 7000hz. Neither one are big deals as most sounds fall in between. Sounds that are higher than 7000hz are things like high whistles, piccolos, kettle whistles at boiling point, and etc. As you can see, no big deal.

I do agree that hearing with a CI is not normal hearing in the sense what all the amazing things that the ear can do. However for all that in the scheme of things, it isn't something one needs to pontificate about.
 
Last edited:
Excellent post Cloggy! :)

My former CI audi and I had a conversation about CI simulations. She asked me if I thought they accurately represented what I hear through my CIs. I said no -- that it was crude in comparison. Many of these CI simulations sound *very* harsh, distorted and robotic compared to the smooth, clear and "natural" sound many CI users experience.

How a CI sounds is largely determined by the brain's ability to interpret what it hears. You can have two people with the same CI, same surgery/activation dates, same prelingual, perilingual or postlingual deafness and yet all of their experiences will differ -- not because hearing with the CI is a different process than hearing "normally -- but because each person's brain interprets sound differently. Some CI users (like myself) will report 100% of sounds and voices sounding "natural" and exactly like they remember before losing their hearing while others will not.

It really boils down to the brain and how well it learns to interpret the signals it receives from the CI...
 
With new CI technology, the sound that is experienced is similar to "CD quality sound" as opposed to older technology and "FM quality sound."

Hearing is hearing -- period. As long as I can hear with my CIs, I don't care if it's "FM quality sound," "CD quality sound," or as good as what someone with normal hearing experiences.
 
Hear Again said:
With new CI technology, the sound that is experienced is similar to "CD quality sound" as opposed to older technology and "FM quality sound."

Hearing is hearing -- period. As long as I can hear with my CIs, I don't care if it's "FM quality sound," "CD quality sound," or as good as what someone with normal hearing experiences.
Click to expand...

Ok..cool. I am happy that they worked out well for u. :)
 
Hear Again said:
....
Hearing is hearing -- period. As long as I can hear with my CIs, I don't care if it's "FM quality sound," "CD quality sound," or as good as what someone with normal hearing experiences.
Click to expand...

Same here.. I just want to able to understand speech either with my HAs(for me) or CI (for CIers) :hug:
 
Back
Top