Literature DB >> 16261267

Temporal masking in electric hearing.

Fan-Gang Zeng1, Hongbin Chen, Shilong Han.   

Abstract

Temporal masking can be defined as the detection threshold of a brief signal as a function of the signal delay in a relatively long masker. The temporal masking pattern in normal acoustic hearing reveals temporal edge enhancement in which the signal detection threshold is greater near the masker onset than in the steady-state portion. Both peripheral and central mechanisms appear to underlie temporal edge enhancement, but their relative contributions remain elusive. Cochlear implants bypass cochlear mechanical processing and stimulate the auditory nerve directly, thereby providing a unique opportunity to separate the peripheral mechanisms from the central mechanisms. Here, we systematically measured temporal masking in electric hearing by examining whether a brief signal was harder to detect at the onset than in the steady-state portion of a long masker (the "overshoot" effect). The signal and the masker were presented (1) either to the same electrode or to different electrodes, (2) at the same stimulation or different rates, and (3) in a simultaneous or an interleaved fashion. A consistent pattern of results was observed, depending on the stimulus configuration between the signal and the masker. Simultaneous stimulation at the same rate and with the same electrode produced no difference in sensitivity between the onset and the steady-state conditions, but interleaved stimulation at different rates or with different electrodes produced a significant difference. Unlike acoustic hearing, high masker levels produced an overshoot effect, and low masker levels produced an undershoot effect. Although the present results are consistent with the "on-frequency vs. off-frequency" hypothesis for the overshoot effect, results also suggest a central "same vs. different" mechanism underlying temporal masking. These results have practical implications for improving cochlear implant design.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16261267      PMCID: PMC2504624          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-005-0016-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  56 in total

1.  Overshoot effects using Schroeder-phase harmonic maskers in listeners with normal hearing and with hearing impairment.

Authors:  V Summers
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Speech dynamic range and its effect on cochlear implant performance.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Ginger Grant; John Niparko; John Galvin; Robert Shannon; Jane Opie; Phil Segel
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The relationship between frequency selectivity and overshoot.

Authors:  E A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Emphasis of short-duration acoustic speech cues for cochlear implant users.

Authors:  A E Vandali
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  High-rate conditioning pulse trains in cochlear implants: dynamic range measures with sinusoidal stimuli.

Authors:  Robert S Hong; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Intensity discrimination and increment detection in cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Magdalena Wojtczak; Gail S Donaldson; Neal F Viemeister
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Changes in the simultaneous masked threshold of brief tones.

Authors:  L L Elliott
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1965-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Analysis of receptive fields of cat retinal ganglion cells.

Authors:  R W Rodieck; J Stone
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1965-09       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Auditory nerve fiber responses to electric stimulation: modulated and unmodulated pulse trains.

Authors:  L Litvak; B Delgutte; D Eddington
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  Stochastic resonance and sensory information processing: a tutorial and review of application.

Authors:  Frank Moss; Lawrence M Ward; Walter G Sannita
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.708

View more
  7 in total

1.  Tinnitus Does Not Interfere with Auditory and Speech Perception.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Matthew Richardson; Katie Turner
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Spatial and temporal effects of interleaved masking in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bom Jun Kwon; Chris van den Honert
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-06-03

3.  Effects of electrode separation between speech and noise signals on consonant identification in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bom Jun Kwon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Auditory cortex phase locking to amplitude-modulated cochlear implant pulse trains.

Authors:  John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-03-26       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Ipsilateral masking between acoustic and electric stimulations.

Authors:  Payton Lin; Christopher W Turner; Bruce J Gantz; Hamid R Djalilian; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Effects of stimulus level and rate on psychophysical thresholds for interleaved pulse trains in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Jenny L Goehring; Jacquelyn L Baudhuin; Kendra K Schmid
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Effects of age and hearing loss on overshoot.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.840

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.