Literature DB >> 10491701

Gap detection as a measure of electrode interaction in cochlear implants.

J J Hanekom1, R V Shannon.   

Abstract

Gap detection thresholds were measured as an indication of the amount of interaction between electrodes in a cochlear implant. The hypothesis in this study was as follows: when the two stimuli that bound the gap stimulate the same electrode, and thus the same neural population, the gap detection threshold will be short. As two stimuli are presented to two electrodes that are more widely separated, the amount of neural overlap of the two stimuli decreases, the stimuli sound more dissimilar, and the gap thresholds increase. Gap detection thresholds can thus be used to infer the amount of overlap in neural populations stimulated by two electrodes. Three users of the Nucleus cochlear implant participated in this study. Gap detection thresholds were measured as a function of the distance between the two electrode pairs and as a function of the spacing between the two electrodes of a bipolar pair (i.e., using different modes of stimulation). The results indicate that measuring gap detection thresholds may provide an estimate of the amount of electrode interaction. Gap detection thresholds were a function of the physical separation of the electrode pairs used for the two stimuli that bound the gap. Lower gap thresholds were observed when the two electrode pairs were closely spaced, and gap thresholds increased as the separation increased, resulting in a "psychophysical tuning curve" as a function of electrode separation. The sharpness of tuning varied across subjects, and for the three subjects in this study, the tuning was generally sharper for the subjects with better speech recognition. The data also indicate that increasing the separation between active and reference electrodes has limited effect on spatial selectivity (or tuning) as measured perceptually.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10491701     DOI: 10.1121/1.423772

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  15 in total

1.  Correlations Between Pitch and Phoneme Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Their Normal Hearing Peers.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-15

2.  Topographic spread of inferior colliculus activation in response to acoustic and intracochlear electric stimulation.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; Julie A Bierer; John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-08-12

3.  Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; John C Middlebrooks; Ben H Bonham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-10-11       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Optical stimulation of the facial nerve: a new monitoring technique?

Authors:  Ingo Ulrik Teudt; Adam E Nevel; Agnella D Izzo; Joseph T Walsh; Claus-Peter Richter
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Psychophysical assessment of stimulation sites in auditory prosthesis electrode arrays.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Rose A Burkholder-Juhasz; Teresa A Zwolan; Li Xu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Psychophysically based site selection coupled with dichotic stimulation improves speech recognition in noise with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Two-microphone spatial filtering provides speech reception benefits for cochlear implant users in difficult acoustic environments.

Authors:  Raymond L Goldsworthy; Lorraine A Delhorne; Joseph G Desloge; Louis D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Sequential stream segregation in normally-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Channel Interaction During Infrared Light Stimulation in the Cochlea.

Authors:  Aditi Agarwal; Xiaodong Tan; Yingyue Xu; Claus-Peter Richter
Journal:  Lasers Surg Med       Date:  2021-01-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.