Literature DB >> 24157931

Plasticity in human pitch perception induced by tonotopically mismatched electro-acoustic stimulation.

L A J Reiss1, C W Turner2, S A Karsten3, B J Gantz4.   

Abstract

Under normal conditions, the acoustic pitch percept of a pure tone is determined mainly by the tonotopic place of the stimulation along the cochlea. Unlike acoustic stimulation, electric stimulation of a cochlear implant (CI) allows for the direct manipulation of the place of stimulation in human subjects. CI sound processors analyze the range of frequencies needed for speech perception and allocate portions of this range to the small number of electrodes distributed in the cochlea. Because the allocation is assigned independently of the original resonant frequency of the basilar membrane associated with the location of each electrode, CI users who have access to residual hearing in either or both ears often have tonotopic mismatches between the acoustic and electric stimulation. Here we demonstrate plasticity of place pitch representations of up to three octaves in Hybrid CI users after experience with combined electro-acoustic stimulation. The pitch percept evoked by single CI electrodes, measured relative to acoustic tones presented to the non-implanted ear, changed over time in directions that reduced the electro-acoustic pitch mismatch introduced by the CI programming. This trend was particularly apparent when the allocations of stimulus frequencies to electrodes were changed over time, with pitch changes even reversing direction in some subjects. These findings show that pitch plasticity can occur more rapidly and on a greater scale in the mature auditory system than previously thought possible. Overall, the results suggest that the adult auditory system can impose perceptual order on disordered arrays of inputs.
Copyright © 2013 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CI; HA; HF; HL; cochlear implant; electro-acoustic stimulation; hearing aid; hearing loss; high-frequency; hybrid; pitch; plasticity; tonotopic map

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24157931      PMCID: PMC3893921          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.10.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroscience        ISSN: 0306-4522            Impact factor:   3.590


  19 in total

1.  Effects of electrode configuration and frequency allocation on vowel recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant.

Authors:  Q J Fu; R V Shannon
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  S Rosen; A Faulkner; L Wilkinson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Rapid task-related plasticity of spectrotemporal receptive fields in primary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Jonathan Fritz; Shihab Shamma; Mounya Elhilali; David Klein
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2003-10-28       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  Do tests for cochlear dead regions provide important information for fitting hearing aids?

Authors:  Van Summers
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Hunting increases adaptive auditory map plasticity in adult barn owls.

Authors:  Joseph F Bergan; Peter Ro; Daniel Ro; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-10-19       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  A cochlear frequency-position function for several species--29 years later.

Authors:  D D Greenwood
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Rapidly induced auditory plasticity: the ventriloquism aftereffect.

Authors:  G H Recanzone
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-02-03       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Effects of lower frequency-to-electrode allocations on speech and pitch perception with the hybrid short-electrode cochlear implant.

Authors:  Lina A J Reiss; Ann E Perreau; Christopher W Turner
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 1.854

9.  Auditory training with spectrally shifted speech: implications for cochlear implant patient auditory rehabilitation.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; Geraldine Nogaki; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-06-10

10.  Combining acoustic and electrical hearing.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Christopher W Turner
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.325

View more
  45 in total

1.  Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear implant: Final outcomes.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Camille Dunn; Jacob Oleson; Marlan Hansen; Aaron Parkinson; Christopher Turner
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 3.325

2.  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

3.  Frequency-place map for electrical stimulation in cochlear implants: Change over time.

Authors:  Katrien Vermeire; David M Landsberger; Paul H Van de Heyning; Maurits Voormolen; Andrea Kleine Punte; Reinhold Schatzer; Clemens Zierhofer
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Pitch adaptation patterns in bimodal cochlear implant users: over time and after experience.

Authors:  Lina A J Reiss; Rindy A Ito; Jessica L Eggleston; Selena Liao; Jillian J Becker; Carrie E Lakin; Frank M Warren; Sean O McMenomey
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  A Smartphone Application for Customized Frequency Table Selection in Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Daniel Jethanamest; Mahan Azadpour; Annette M Zeman; Elad Sagi; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Cochlear implants and other inner ear prostheses: today and tomorrow.

Authors:  Lina Aj Reiss
Journal:  Curr Opin Physiol       Date:  2020-08-14

7.  Pitch Matching between Electrical Stimulation of a Cochlear Implant and Acoustic Stimuli Presented to a Contralateral Ear with Residual Hearing.

Authors:  Chin-Tuan Tan; Brett Martin; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  Counting or discriminating the number of voices to assess binaural fusion with single-sided vocoders.

Authors:  Jessica M Wess; Nathaniel J Spencer; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Effect of channel separation and interaural mismatch on fusion and lateralization in normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Matthew J Goupell; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Electric and acoustic harmonic integration predicts speech-in-noise performance in hybrid cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Damien Bonnard; Adam Schwalje; Bruce Gantz; Inyong Choi
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.