Literature DB >> 8609291

The perceptual dimensions of single-electrode and nonsimultaneous dual-electrode stimuli in cochlear implantees.

C M McKay1, H J McDermott, G M Clark.   

Abstract

The perceptual dimensions evoked by dual-electrode stimulation were investigated in four cochlear implantees. The dual-electrode stimulation consisted of biphasic current pulse trains, such that two intracochlear electrodes each received one pulse in a 250-Hz cycle. The experiments tested the hypothesis that perceptual qualities would be altered when there was an increased likelihood of interactions occurring between the two electrode places. The parameters of the stimulation which were manipulated to test this hypothesis were the time delay between the pulses on the two electrodes (2 ms and a value between 0.62 and 0.92 ms), the distance between the component electrode rings of each bipolar pair (3.75 mm and either 2.25 or 1.5 mm), and the distance between the two bipolar pairs in the dual-electrode stimuli (from 0.75 to 12.0 mm). Five set of 15 loudness balanced stimuli were created, each set having different stimulation parameters. These stimuli consisted of five single-electrode stimuli (a 250-Hz pulse train on each of five electrodes) and the ten dual-electrode stimuli formed by the combinations of those five electrodes. Two perceptual dissimilarity matrices were obtained for each subject and each set, and were analyzed using repeated nonmetric multidimensional scaling techniques. The resultant "stimulus spaces" were then examined to see how many perceptual dimensions the stimuli were best described by, and to what perceptual or stimulus qualities the dimensions might correspond. The results showed that the percept evoked by dual-electrode stimulation contained two main dimensions. Increasing the width of the current path to create substantially overlapping stimulation areas, or altering the temporal delay between the two electrodes, had very little effect on this percept. The position of the stimuli in the two-dimensional space was related to the distances of the two component electrodes along the electrode array. These results are relevant to speech processing strategies and electrode design for cochlear implants, as they imply that the creation of discrete, nonoverlapping areas of stimulation may not cause the percepts to be more distinct, and therefore may not necessarily lead to better speech perception.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8609291     DOI: 10.1121/1.414594

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

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

2.  Electrically evoked compound action potential measures for virtual channels versus physical electrodes.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Adam M Goulson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Across- and within-channel envelope interactions in cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Sandra I Oba
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-12

4.  Binaural unmasking with multiple adjacent masking electrodes in bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Thomas Lu; Ruth Litovsky; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Discrimination between sequential and simultaneous virtual channels with electrical hearing.

Authors:  David Landsberger; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Multidimensional scaling between acoustic and electric stimuli in cochlear implant users with contralateral hearing.

Authors:  Katrien Vermeire; David M Landsberger; Peter Schleich; Paul H Van de Heyning
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Acoustic to electric pitch comparisons in cochlear implant subjects with residual hearing.

Authors:  Colette Boëx; Lionel Baud; Grégoire Cosendai; Alain Sigrist; Maria-Izabel Kós; Marco Pelizzone
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-02-01

8.  ECAP spread of excitation with virtual channels and physical electrodes.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Lisa J Stille; Jacquelyn L Baudhuin; Jenny L Goehring
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  MUSIC APPRECIATION AND TRAINING FOR COCHLEAR IMPLANT RECIPIENTS: A REVIEW.

Authors:  Valerie Looi; Kate Gfeller; Virginia Driscoll
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2012-11-19

10.  Abnormal pitch perception produced by cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Qing Tang; Thomas Lu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.