Literature DB >> 20058987

A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners.

Monita Chatterjee1, Jian Yu.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine the relation between measures of spectral and temporal resolutions in cochlear implant listeners at a particular electrode location. The hypothesis was that a common underlying factor, such as the health of local groups of neurons, might partially determine patients' sensitivity to both spectral and temporal cues at specific tonotopic locations. Participants were adult cochlear implant listeners. A significant correlation was found between electrode discrimination measured at soft levels (20% and 30% of the dynamic range) and modulation sensitivity at those levels, for stimulation in bipolar mode and a 100 Hz modulation rate. Correlations between the two measures were weaker under monopolar stimulation, or when the modulation rate was 10 Hz. At a higher stimulation level (40% of the dynamic range), no significant correlations between these measures were observed. It is hypothesized that the more restricted excitation pattern at lower levels and/or with a narrower stimulation mode allows the measurement of locally driven sensitivity to spectral and temporal cues, particularly under more challenging listening conditions. Thus, psychophysical measures obtained under conditions that evoke a narrower excitation pattern may serve as a useful indicator of the functional health of local neural populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20058987      PMCID: PMC2821169          DOI: 10.1121/1.3257591

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


  36 in total

1.  Noise improves modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners at moderate carrier levels.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Sandra I Oba
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-09

3.  Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition.

Authors:  Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effect of electrode configuration on psychophysical forward masking in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Bom Jun Kwon; Chris van den Honert
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Anthony J Spahr; Aniket A Saoji; Gene Y Fridman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-06-21

7.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Effects of carrier pulse rate and stimulation site on modulation detection by subjects with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival.

Authors:  Pavel Prado-Guitierrez; Leonie M Fewster; John M Heasman; Colette M McKay; Robert K Shepherd
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2006-04-27       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Psychophysical and physiological measures of electrical-field interaction in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Lisa J Stille
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  13 in total

1.  Pitch contour identification with combined place and temporal cues using cochlear implants.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Monica Padilla; David M Landsberger
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A psychophysical method for measuring spatial resolution in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Mahan Azadpour; Colette M McKay
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-10-15

Review 3.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

4.  Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.

Authors:  Matthew B Winn; Jong Ho Won; Il Joon Moon
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Interaural Pitch-Discrimination Range Effects for Bilateral and Single-Sided-Deafness Cochlear-Implant Users.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell; Stefano Cosentino; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2019-01-08

6.  Effects of electrode configuration on cochlear implant modulation detection thresholds.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Kaibao Nie; Elyse M Jameyson; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Recovery from forward masking in cochlear implant listeners depends on stimulation mode, level, and electrode location.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Aditya M Kulkarni
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Temporal Modulation Detection Depends on Sharpness of Spatial Tuning.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Matthew Cadmus; Lixue Dong; Juliana Mathews
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-04-25

10.  Comparisons between detection threshold and loudness perception for individual cochlear implant channels.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; Amberly D Nye
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.