Literature DB >> 27208791

Perceptually aligning apical frequency regions leads to more binaural fusion of speech in a cochlear implant simulation.

Hannah E Staisloff1, Daniel H Lee2, Justin M Aronoff3.   

Abstract

For bilateral cochlear implant users, the left and right arrays are typically not physically aligned, resulting in a degradation of binaural fusion, which can be detrimental to binaural abilities. Perceptually aligning the two arrays can be accomplished by disabling electrodes in one ear that do not have a perceptually corresponding electrode in the other side. However, disabling electrodes at the edges of the array will cause compression of the input frequency range into a smaller cochlear extent, which may result in reduced spectral resolution. An alternative approach to overcome this mismatch would be to only align one edge of the array. By aligning either only the apical or basal end of the arrays, fewer electrodes would be disabled, potentially causing less reduction in spectral resolution. The goal of this study was to determine the relative effect of aligning either the basal or apical end of the electrode with regards to binaural fusion. A vocoder was used to simulate cochlear implant listening conditions in normal hearing listeners. Speech signals were vocoded such that the two ears were either predominantly aligned at only the basal or apical end of the simulated arrays. The experiment was then repeated with a spectrally inverted vocoder to determine whether the detrimental effects on fusion were related to the spectral-temporal characteristics of the stimuli or the location in the cochlea where the misalignment occurred. In Experiment 1, aligning the basal portion of the simulated arrays led to significantly less binaural fusion than aligning the apical portions of the simulated array. However, when the input was spectrally inverted, aligning the apical portion of the simulated array led to significantly less binaural fusion than aligning the basal portions of the simulated arrays. These results suggest that, for speech, with its predominantly low frequency spectral-temporal modulations, it is more important to perceptually align the apical portion of the array to better preserve binaural fusion. By partially aligning these arrays, cochlear implant users could potentially increase their ability to fuse speech sounds presented to the two ears while maximizing spectral resolution.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Binaural fusion; Binaural hearing; Cochlear implants

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27208791      PMCID: PMC5014763          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2016.05.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  22 in total

1.  Perception of across-frequency interaural level differences.

Authors:  Tom Francart; Jan Wouters
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Corey Stoelb; Ruth Y Litovsky; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Sensitivity to interaural time difference with bilateral cochlear implants: Development over time and effect of interaural electrode spacing.

Authors:  Becky B Poon; Donald K Eddington; Victor Noel; H Steven Colburn
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Cochlear implants: histopathologic findings related to performance in 16 human temporal bones.

Authors:  J Fayad; F H Linthicum; S R Otto; F R Galey; W F House
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 1.547

5.  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

6.  Non-destructive determination of uranium, thorium and 40K in tobacco and their implication on radiation dose levels to the human body.

Authors:  S Landsberger; R Lara; S G Landsberger
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 0.972

7.  Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on the salience of binaural cues in conditions that simulate bilateral cochlear-implant listening.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell; Corey Stoelb; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Abnormal binaural spectral integration in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Lina A J Reiss; Rindy A Ito; Jessica L Eggleston; David R Wozny
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-01-24

9.  Investigating interaural frequency-place mismatches via bimodal vowel integration.

Authors:  François Guérit; Sébastien Santurette; Josef Chalupper; Torsten Dau
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-11-23       Impact factor: 3.293

10.  Comparison of Interaural Electrode Pairing Methods for Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Hongmei Hu; Mathias Dietz
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 3.293

View more
  4 in total

1.  Binaural Optimization of Cochlear Implants: Discarding Frequency Content Without Sacrificing Head-Shadow Benefit.

Authors:  Sterling W Sheffield; Matthew J Goupell; Nathaniel J Spencer; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Computed-Tomography Estimates of Interaural Mismatch in Insertion Depth and Scalar Location in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell; Jack H Noble; Sandeep A Phatak; Elizabeth Kolberg; Miranda Cleary; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Kenneth K Jensen; Michael Hoa; Hung Jeffrey Kim; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 2.619

3.  Effects of tonotopic matching and spatial cues on segregation of competing speech in simulations of bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Mathew Thomas; Shelby Willis; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.752

4.  Clinically Paired Electrodes Are Often Not Perceived as Pitch Matched.

Authors:  Justin M Aronoff; Monica Padilla; Julia Stelmach; David M Landsberger
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-09-18       Impact factor: 3.293

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.