Reduction of the Harmonic Series Influences Musical Enjoyment With Cochlear Implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implantation is associated with poor music perception and enjoyment. Reducing music complexity has been shown to enhance music enjoyment in cochlear implant (CI) recipients. In this study, we assess the impact of harmonic series reduction on music enjoyment. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective analysis of music enjoyment in normal-hearing (NH) individuals and CI recipients. SETTING: Single tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: NH adults (N = 20) and CI users (N = 8) rated the Happy Birthday song on three validated enjoyment modalities-musicality, pleasantness, and naturalness. INTERVENTION: Subjective rating of music excerpts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants listened to seven different instruments play the melody, each with five levels of harmonic reduction (Full, F3+F2+F1+F0, F2+F1+F0, F1+F0, F0). NH participants listened to the segments both with and without CI simulation. Linear mixed effect models (LME) and likelihood ratio tests were used to assess the impact of harmonic reduction on enjoyment. RESULTS: NH listeners without simulation rated segments with the first four harmonics (F3+F2+F1+F0) most pleasant and natural (p <0.001, p = 0.004). NH listeners with simulation rated the first harmonic alone (F0) most pleasant and natural (p <0.001, p = 0.003). Their ratings demonstrated a positive linear relationship between harmonic reduction and both pleasantness (slope estimate = 0.030, SE = 0.004, p <0.001, LME) and naturalness (slope estimate = 0.012, SE = 0.003, p = 0.003, LME). CI recipients also found the first harmonic alone (F0) to be most pleasant (p = 0.003), with a positive linear relationship between harmonic reduction and pleasantness (slope estimate = 0.029, SE = 0.008, p <0.001, LME). CONCLUSION: Harmonic series reduction increases music enjoyment in CI and NH individuals with or without CI simulation. Therefore, minimization of the harmonics may be a useful strategy for enhancing musical enjoyment among both NH and CI listeners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".