基于中国文化背景临床音乐感知评估软件在听力正常人群中的可行性分析

Feasibility Evaluation of Music Assessment in Clinical in People with Normal Hearing

目的通过听力正常人群的测试,对具有中国文化背景的临床音乐感知评估(music assessment in clinical,MAC)软件的可行性进行初步探索。方法对40例听力正常者(男17例,女23例,年龄18~37岁)分别进行MAC中的音调辨差阈、旋律感知、乐器识别(音色识别)三个项目测试,以及国际通用的人工耳蜗音乐感知评估软件(musical sounds in cochlear implants perception,Mu.S.I.C)对应的音调辨别、旋律感知、乐器识别三项测试,对结果进行比较;同时记录测试时长,分析受试者对两款软件测试项目的主观喜好感觉评分。结果(1)受试者对两款软件的音调、旋律、音色三项测试的主观喜好度相近(P>0.05),两款软件测试项目的测试时长相近(P>0.05);(2)MAC软件音调辨差阈值均为1个1/4音,Mu.S.I.C软件平均音调辨差阈值为7.47±6.42个1/4音,两者存在统计学差异(P<0.01);(3)MAC软件平均旋律感知正确率(95.63%±6.76%)较Mu.S.I.C软件的旋律感知正确率(84.13%±7.96%)高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);(4)MAC软件的音色识别正确率为87.34%±10.25%,Mu.S.I.C软件的音色识别正确率为84.38%±12.97%,两者无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论听力正常受试者对两款软件的喜好度及测试时长无差异;受试者使用MAC软件测得的音调、旋律辨识水平较Mu.S.I.C软件更高,提示基于中国文化背景的MAC软件在听力正常人群中的应用具有可行性。

Objective Through the assessment of music perception in people with normal hearing,the feasibility of music assessment in clinical(MAC),which is developed by our research group based on Chinese culture and music background was evaluated.Methods A total of 40 normal hearing adults(23 females and 17males,aged 18 to 37 years)participated in the test of both MAC and“musical sounds in cochlear implants perception”(Mu.S.I.C)software.Their pitch,melody,and timbre perception abilities were evaluated under“pitch discrimination threshold”,“melody identification”,“instrument identification”sessions of MAC and“pitch discrimination”,“melody discrimination”,“instrument identification”sessions of Mu.S.I.C.In addition,the test duration was recorded,and the subjects’subjective preference scores for the two software test items were analyzed.Results(1)There was no statistically significant difference in the subjective preference scores of timbre,melody and pitch test between MAC and Mu.S.I.C software(P>0.05).There was no significant difference between the test duration of MAC and Mu.S.I.C among the 40 subjects(P>0.05).(2)The pitch discrimination threshold of MAC for all subjects was 1 quarter-tone,significantly lower than the average pitch discrimination threshold(7.47±6.42 quarter-tone)of Mu.S.I.C(P<0.01).(3)The average accuracy rate of familiar melody identification in MAC(95.63%±6.76%)was significantly higher than that of Mu.S.I.C software(84.13%±7.96%).(4)There was no significant difference(P>0.05)between the instrument identification performance of MAC(87.34%±10.25%)and Mu.S.I.C(84.38%±12.97%).Conclusion There was no significant difference in the subjects’preferences and test duration between the two softwares.The pitch and melody recognition scores were higher using MAC when comparing with Mu.S.I.C,which initially verified the clinical feasibility of MAC.