Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2016

Open Access 01-08-2016 | Research Article

Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users

Authors: Stefano Cosentino, Robert P. Carlyon, John M. Deeks, Wendy Parkinson, Julie A. Bierer

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Cochlear implant (CI) users have poor temporal pitch perception, as revealed by two key outcomes of rate discrimination tests: (i) rate discrimination thresholds (RDTs) are typically larger than the corresponding frequency difference limen for pure tones in normal hearing listeners, and (ii) above a few hundred pulses per second (i.e. the “upper limit” of pitch), CI users cannot discriminate further increases in pulse rate. Both RDTs at low rates and the upper limit of pitch vary across listeners and across electrodes in a given listener. Here, we compare across-electrode and across-subject variation in these two measures with the variation in performance on another temporal processing task, gap detection, in order to explore the limitations of temporal processing in CI users. RDTs were obtained for 4–5 electrodes in each of 10 Advanced Bionics CI users using two interleaved adaptive tracks, corresponding to standard rates of 100 and 400 pps. Gap detection was measured using the adaptive procedure and stimuli described by Bierer et al. (JARO 16:273-284, 2015), and for the same electrodes and listeners as for the rate discrimination measures. Pitch ranking was also performed using a mid-point comparison technique. There was a marginal across-electrode correlation between gap detection and rate discrimination at 400 pps, but neither measure correlated with rate discrimination at 100 pps. Similarly, there was a highly significant across-subject correlation between gap detection and rate discrimination at 400, but not 100 pps, and these two correlations differed significantly from each other. Estimates of low-rate sensitivity and of the upper limit of pitch, obtained from the pitch ranking experiment, correlated well with rate discrimination for the 100- and 400-pps standards, respectively. The results are consistent with the upper limit of rate discrimination sharing a common basis with gap detection. There was no evidence that this limitation also applied to rate discrimination at lower rates.
Literature
go back to reference Bierer JA (2007) Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am 121:1642–1653CrossRefPubMed Bierer JA (2007) Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am 121:1642–1653CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad cochlear implant electrode configurations. JARO 16:273–284CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad cochlear implant electrode configurations. JARO 16:273–284CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Bland J, Altman D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310CrossRef Bland J, Altman D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310CrossRef
go back to reference Carlyon RP, Deeks JM (2015) Combined neural and behavioural measures of temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 138:2885–2905CrossRefPubMed Carlyon RP, Deeks JM (2015) Combined neural and behavioural measures of temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 138:2885–2905CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Carlyon RP, Long CJ, Deeks JM (2008) Pulse-rate discrimination by cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners with and without binaural cues. J Acoust Soc Am 123:2276–2286CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Carlyon RP, Long CJ, Deeks JM (2008) Pulse-rate discrimination by cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners with and without binaural cues. J Acoust Soc Am 123:2276–2286CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, McKay CM (2010) The upper limit of temporal pitch for cochlear-implant listeners: stimulus duration, conditioner pulses, and the number of electrodes stimulated. J Acoust Soc Am 127:1469–1478CrossRefPubMed Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, McKay CM (2010) The upper limit of temporal pitch for cochlear-implant listeners: stimulus duration, conditioner pulses, and the number of electrodes stimulated. J Acoust Soc Am 127:1469–1478CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Chung Y, Hancock KE, Nam S-I, Delgutte B (2014) Coding of electric pulse trains presented through cochlear implants in the auditory midbrain of awake rabbit: comparison with anesthetized preparations. J Neurosci 34:218–231CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chung Y, Hancock KE, Nam S-I, Delgutte B (2014) Coding of electric pulse trains presented through cochlear implants in the auditory midbrain of awake rabbit: comparison with anesthetized preparations. J Neurosci 34:218–231CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Collins LM, Zwolan TA, Wakefield GH (1997) Comparison of electrode discrimination, pitch ranking, and pitch scaling data in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 101:440–455CrossRefPubMed Collins LM, Zwolan TA, Wakefield GH (1997) Comparison of electrode discrimination, pitch ranking, and pitch scaling data in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 101:440–455CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference DeVries LA, Scheperle RA, Bierer JA (2015) The electrically evoked compound action potential, computerized tomography, and behavioral measures to assess the electrode-neuron Interface. In: Conference on implantable auditory prostheses. Lake Tahoe, p 219 DeVries LA, Scheperle RA, Bierer JA (2015) The electrically evoked compound action potential, computerized tomography, and behavioral measures to assess the electrode-neuron Interface. In: Conference on implantable auditory prostheses. Lake Tahoe, p 219
go back to reference Garadat SN, Pfingst BE (2011) Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users. Hear Res 275:130–138CrossRefPubMed Garadat SN, Pfingst BE (2011) Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users. Hear Res 275:130–138CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hancock KE, Chung Y, Delgutte B (2012) Neural ITD coding with bilateral cochlear implants: effect of binaurally coherent jitter. J Neurophysiol 108:714–728CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hancock KE, Chung Y, Delgutte B (2012) Neural ITD coding with bilateral cochlear implants: effect of binaurally coherent jitter. J Neurophysiol 108:714–728CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Hochmair-Desoyer IJ, Hochmair ES, Burian K, Stiglbrunner HK (1983) Percepts from the Vienna cochlear prosthesis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 405:295–306CrossRefPubMed Hochmair-Desoyer IJ, Hochmair ES, Burian K, Stiglbrunner HK (1983) Percepts from the Vienna cochlear prosthesis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 405:295–306CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ihlefeld A, Carlyon R, Kan A, Churchill T, Litovsky R (2015) Limitations on monaural and binaural temporal processing in bilateral cochlear implant listeners. JARO 16:641–652CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ihlefeld A, Carlyon R, Kan A, Churchill T, Litovsky R (2015) Limitations on monaural and binaural temporal processing in bilateral cochlear implant listeners. JARO 16:641–652CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Joris P, Verschooten E (2013) On the limit of neural phase locking to fine structure in humans. In: Moore BCJ, Patterson RD, Winter IM, Carlyon RP, Gockel HE (eds) Basic aspects of hearing. Springer, New York, pp 101–108CrossRef Joris P, Verschooten E (2013) On the limit of neural phase locking to fine structure in humans. In: Moore BCJ, Patterson RD, Winter IM, Carlyon RP, Gockel HE (eds) Basic aspects of hearing. Springer, New York, pp 101–108CrossRef
go back to reference Kenway B, Tam Y, Vanat Z, Harris F, Gray R, Brirchall J, Carlyon RP, Axon PR (2015) Pitch discrimination: an independent factor in cochlear implant performance outcomes. Otol Neurotol 36:1472–1479CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kenway B, Tam Y, Vanat Z, Harris F, Gray R, Brirchall J, Carlyon RP, Axon PR (2015) Pitch discrimination: an independent factor in cochlear implant performance outcomes. Otol Neurotol 36:1472–1479CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Kong Y-Y, Carlyon RP (2010) Temporal pitch perception at high rates in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 127:3114–3123CrossRefPubMed Kong Y-Y, Carlyon RP (2010) Temporal pitch perception at high rates in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 127:3114–3123CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Kong Y-Y, Deeks JM, Axon PR, Carlyon RP (2009) Limits of temporal pitch in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 125:1649–1657CrossRefPubMed Kong Y-Y, Deeks JM, Axon PR, Carlyon RP (2009) Limits of temporal pitch in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 125:1649–1657CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Laback B, Majdak P, Baumgartner WD (2007) Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2182–2191CrossRefPubMed Laback B, Majdak P, Baumgartner WD (2007) Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2182–2191CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Landsberger DM, McKay CM (2005) Perceptual differences between low and high rates of stimulation on single electrodes for cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am 117:319–327CrossRefPubMed Landsberger DM, McKay CM (2005) Perceptual differences between low and high rates of stimulation on single electrodes for cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am 117:319–327CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Long CJ, Nimmo-Smith I, Baguley DM, O'Driscoll M, Ramsden R, Otto SR, Axon PR, Carlyon RP (2005) Optimizing the clinical fit of auditory brain stem implants. Ear Hear 26:251–262CrossRefPubMed Long CJ, Nimmo-Smith I, Baguley DM, O'Driscoll M, Ramsden R, Otto SR, Axon PR, Carlyon RP (2005) Optimizing the clinical fit of auditory brain stem implants. Ear Hear 26:251–262CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Long CJ, Holden TA, McClelland GH, Parkinson WS, Shelton C, Kelsall DC, Smith ZM (2014) Examining the electro-neural interface of cochlear implant users using psychophysics, CT scans, and speech understanding. JARO 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Long CJ, Holden TA, McClelland GH, Parkinson WS, Shelton C, Kelsall DC, Smith ZM (2014) Examining the electro-neural interface of cochlear implant users using psychophysics, CT scans, and speech understanding. JARO 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Macherey O, Deeks J, Carlyon R (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. JARO 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed Macherey O, Deeks J, Carlyon R (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. JARO 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Majdak P, Laback B, Baumgartner WD (2006) Effects of interaural time differences in fine structure and envelope on lateral discrimination in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 120:2190–2201CrossRefPubMed Majdak P, Laback B, Baumgartner WD (2006) Effects of interaural time differences in fine structure and envelope on lateral discrimination in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 120:2190–2201CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference McKay CM, McDermott HJ (1998) Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: the effect of interpulse intervals. J Acoust Soc Am 104:1061–1074CrossRefPubMed McKay CM, McDermott HJ (1998) Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: the effect of interpulse intervals. J Acoust Soc Am 104:1061–1074CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Moore BCJ, Carlyon RP (2005) Perception of pitch by people with cochlear hearing loss and by cochlear implant users. In: Fay R, Oxenham A, Popper A, Plack C (eds) Pitch. Springer, New York, pp 234–277CrossRef Moore BCJ, Carlyon RP (2005) Perception of pitch by people with cochlear hearing loss and by cochlear implant users. In: Fay R, Oxenham A, Popper A, Plack C (eds) Pitch. Springer, New York, pp 234–277CrossRef
go back to reference Moore BC, Ernst SM (2012) Frequency difference limens at high frequencies: evidence for a transition from a temporal to a place code. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1542–1547CrossRefPubMed Moore BC, Ernst SM (2012) Frequency difference limens at high frequencies: evidence for a transition from a temporal to a place code. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1542–1547CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Noble JH, Gifford RH, Hedley-Williams AJ, Dawant BM, Labadie RF (2014) Clinical evaluation of an image-guided cochlear implant programming strategy. Audiol Neurotol 19:400–411CrossRef Noble JH, Gifford RH, Hedley-Williams AJ, Dawant BM, Labadie RF (2014) Clinical evaluation of an image-guided cochlear implant programming strategy. Audiol Neurotol 19:400–411CrossRef
go back to reference Pfingst BE, Xu L (2004) Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. JARO 5:11–24CrossRefPubMed Pfingst BE, Xu L (2004) Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. JARO 5:11–24CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfingst BE, Holloway LA, Poopat N, Subramanya AR, Warren MF, Zwolan TA (1994) Effects of stimulus level on nonspectral frequency discrimination by human subjects. Hear Res 78:197–209 Pfingst BE, Holloway LA, Poopat N, Subramanya AR, Warren MF, Zwolan TA (1994) Effects of stimulus level on nonspectral frequency discrimination by human subjects. Hear Res 78:197–209
go back to reference Plack CJ, Moore BC (1990) Temporal window shape as a function of frequency and level. J Acoust Soc Am 87:2178–2187CrossRefPubMed Plack CJ, Moore BC (1990) Temporal window shape as a function of frequency and level. J Acoust Soc Am 87:2178–2187CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Shannon RV (1983) Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear Res 11:157–189CrossRefPubMed Shannon RV (1983) Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear Res 11:157–189CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Stahl P, Macherey O, Meunier S, Roman S (2014) Rate discrimination at low pulse rates: comparison between normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners and influence of intracochlear stimulation site. In: 6th workshop on speech in noise: intelligibility and quality. Marseille Stahl P, Macherey O, Meunier S, Roman S (2014) Rate discrimination at low pulse rates: comparison between normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners and influence of intracochlear stimulation site. In: 6th workshop on speech in noise: intelligibility and quality. Marseille
go back to reference Steinhaus H (1950) Mathematical snapshots. Oxford University Press, New York Steinhaus H (1950) Mathematical snapshots. Oxford University Press, New York
go back to reference Townshend B, Cotter N, Van Compernolle D, White RL (1987) Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 82:106–115CrossRefPubMed Townshend B, Cotter N, Van Compernolle D, White RL (1987) Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 82:106–115CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference van Hoesel RJM (2007) Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2192–2206CrossRefPubMed van Hoesel RJM (2007) Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2192–2206CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference van Hoesel RJM, Clark GM (1997) Psychophysical studies with two binaural cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 102:495–507CrossRefPubMed van Hoesel RJM, Clark GM (1997) Psychophysical studies with two binaural cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 102:495–507CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Long CJ, Wouters J (2003) Pitch of amplitude-modulated irregular-rate stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 114:1516–1528CrossRefPubMed Van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Long CJ, Wouters J (2003) Pitch of amplitude-modulated irregular-rate stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 114:1516–1528CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Vollmer M, Beitel RE, Snyder RL, Leake PA (2007) Spatial selectivity to intracochlear electrical stimulation in the inferior colliculus is degraded after long-term deafness in cats. J Neurophysiol 98:2588–2603CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vollmer M, Beitel RE, Snyder RL, Leake PA (2007) Spatial selectivity to intracochlear electrical stimulation in the inferior colliculus is degraded after long-term deafness in cats. J Neurophysiol 98:2588–2603CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Wier CC, Jesteadt W, Green DM (1977) Frequency discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level. J Acoust Soc Am 61:178–184CrossRefPubMed Wier CC, Jesteadt W, Green DM (1977) Frequency discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level. J Acoust Soc Am 61:178–184CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wilson BS (1997) Thirty years of the British Journal of Audiology: guest editorial: the future of cochlear implants. Br J Audiol 31:205–225CrossRefPubMed Wilson BS (1997) Thirty years of the British Journal of Audiology: guest editorial: the future of cochlear implants. Br J Audiol 31:205–225CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users
Authors
Stefano Cosentino
Robert P. Carlyon
John M. Deeks
Wendy Parkinson
Julie A. Bierer
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-016-0569-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2016 Go to the issue