Literature DB >> 6895638

Psychophysical studies for two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients.

Y C Tong, G M Clark, P J Blamey, P A Busby, R C Dowell.   

Abstract

Psychophysical studies were conducted on two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients to examine the nature of the hearing sensations produced by electrical stimulation of auditory nerve fibers using electrodes at different sites in the scala tympani (one electrode at a time). Both time-invariant stimuli, whose parameter values did not vary in time, and time-varying stimuli, specified by a linear variation in parameter values, were used. A sharpness ranking study using time-invariant signals suggested that the hearing sensations produced by different electrodes varied from dull to sharp in an apical to basal direction in the scala tympani. A categorization study showed that the hearing sensations produced by two adjacent electrodes (1.5 mm apart) were rarely confused for a restricted range of time-invariant pulse rates. Discriminability studies by a same-different procedure for stimuli with pulse rate below 250 pps showed: (1) relative difference limens of 6% to 12% for time-invariant pulse rates, and 9% and 13% for time-varying pulse rates; (2) stimuli with time-varying electrode position differing in the direction of electrode trajectory were readily discriminated; and (3) the discrimination of time-varying pulse rates deteriorated with decreases in the duration of the variation, while the discriminability of single-electrode trajectories was the same for the three durations: 25, 50, and 100 ms. A speech processing strategy was also proposed on the bases of these results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 6895638     DOI: 10.1121/1.387342

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


  21 in total

Review 1.  The multiple-channel cochlear implant: the interface between sound and the central nervous system for hearing, speech, and language in deaf people-a personal perspective.

Authors:  Graeme M Clark
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-05-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Multichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Johan Laneau; Jan Wouters
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-05-27

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Electromotile hearing: acoustic tones mask psychophysical response to high-frequency electrical stimulation of intact guinea pig cochleae.

Authors:  Colleen G Le Prell; Kohei Kawamoto; Yehoash Raphael; David F Dolan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The multichannel cochlear implant for severe-to-profound hearing loss.

Authors:  Graeme M Clark
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 53.440

7.  Investigating the effects of stimulus duration and context on pitch perception by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Joshua S Stohl; Chandra S Throckmorton; Leslie M Collins
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Effects of stimulus duration on amplitude modulation processing with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Xin Luo; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Chronic neurotrophin delivery promotes ectopic neurite growth from the spiral ganglion of deafened cochleae without compromising the spatial selectivity of cochlear implants.

Authors:  Thomas G Landry; James B Fallon; Andrew K Wise; Robert K Shepherd
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 3.215

10.  Is there a fundamental 300 Hz limit to pulse rate discrimination in cochlear implants?

Authors:  Pieter J Venter; Johan J Hanekom
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-06-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.