Enhancement of temporal cues to pitch in cochlear implants: effects on pitch ranking.

The abilities to hear changes in pitch for sung vowels and understand speech using an experimental sound coding strategy (eTone) that enhanced coding of temporal fundamental frequency (F0) information were tested in six cochlear implant users, and compared with performance using their clinical (ACE) strategy. In addition, rate- and modulation rate-pitch difference limens (DLs) were measured using synthetic stimuli with F0s below 300 Hz to determine psychophysical abilities of each subject and to provide experience in attending to rate cues for the judgment of pitch. Sung-vowel pitch ranking tests for stimuli separated by three semitones presented across an F0 range of one octave (139-277 Hz) showed a significant benefit for the experimental strategy compared to ACE. Average d-prime (d') values for eTone (d' = 1.05) were approximately three time larger than for ACE (d' = 0.35). Similar scores for both strategies in the speech recognition tests showed that coding of segmental speech information by the experimental strategy was not degraded. Average F0 DLs were consistent with results from previous studies and for all subjects were less than or equal to approximately three semitones for F0s of 125 and 200 Hz.

[1]  H J McDermott,et al.  Pitch matching of amplitude-modulated current pulse trains by cochlear implantees: the effect of modulation depth. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  C M McKay,et al.  Dual temporal pitch percepts from acoustic and electric amplitude-modulated pulse trains. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Dirk Van Compernolle,et al.  Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Hugh J. McDermott,et al.  Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: a comparison of sound-processing strategies. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Marc Moonen,et al.  Improved Music Perception with Explicit Pitch Coding in Cochlear Implants , 2006, Audiology and Neurotology.

[6]  K. Plant,et al.  Speech Perception as a Function of Electrical Stimulation Rate: Using the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant System , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[7]  H J McDermott,et al.  The perception of temporal patterns for electrical stimulation presented at one or two intracochlear sites. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  J. Smurzyński,et al.  Pitch identification and discrimination for complex tones with many harmonics , 1990 .

[9]  Andrew E. Vandali,et al.  Development of a temporal fundamental frequency coding strategy for cochlear implants. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  H. Dai On the relative influence of individual harmonics on pitch judgment. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Enhancing temporal cues to voice pitch in continuous interleaved sampling cochlear implants. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  H J McDermott,et al.  Pitch percepts associated with amplitude-modulated current pulse trains in cochlear implantees. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  G M Clark,et al.  Absolute identification of electric pulse rates and electrode positions by cochlear implant patients. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Hugh J. McDermott Music Perception with Cochlear Implants: A Review , 2004, Trends in amplification.

[15]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Temporal pitch in electric hearing , 2002, Hearing Research.

[16]  Christopher J. Plack,et al.  Differences in frequency modulation detection and fundamental frequency discrimination between complex tones consisting of resolved and unresolved harmonics , 1995 .

[17]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Enhancement of temporal periodicity cues in cochlear implants: effects on prosodic perception and vowel identification. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  R. Shannon Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants , 1985, Hearing Research.

[19]  Marc Moonen,et al.  Relative contributions of temporal and place pitch cues to fundamental frequency discrimination in cochlear implantees. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  R. Shannon Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  R. Carlyon,et al.  The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Hugh J. McDermott,et al.  Pitch ranking of complex tones by normally hearing subjects and cochlear implant users , 2007, Hearing Research.

[23]  Hugh J. McDermott,et al.  Place and temporal cues in pitch perception: are they truly independent? , 2000 .

[24]  Yi Xu Contextual tonal variations in Mandarin , 1997 .

[25]  Walter F. Bischof,et al.  Thresholds From Psychometric Functions: Superiority of Bootstrap to Incremental and Probit Variance Estimators , 1991 .

[26]  B C Moore,et al.  Pitch discrimination and phase sensitivity in young and elderly subjects and its relationship to frequency selectivity. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Bernard Fraysse,et al.  Music Perception in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients , 2003, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[28]  P Seligman,et al.  Architecture of the Spectra 22 speech processor. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[29]  C. Plack,et al.  Temporal processing of the pitch of complex tones. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  B. Moore,et al.  Relative dominance of individual partials in determining the pitch of complex tones , 1985 .

[31]  Alexander L. Francis,et al.  The perception of Cantonese lexical tones by early-deafened cochlear implantees. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. , 1962, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[33]  Lawrence T. Cohen,et al.  Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 2. Spread of the effective stimulation field (ESF), from ECAP and FEA , 2009, Hearing Research.

[34]  R. Cowan,et al.  Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking , 2003, Hearing Research.

[35]  J. Knutson,et al.  Musical backgrounds, listening habits, and aesthetic enjoyment of adult cochlear implant recipients. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[36]  A. Boothroyd,et al.  Voice Fundamental Frequency as an Auditory Supplement to the Speechreading of Sentences , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[37]  L. Wong,et al.  Tone Perception of Cantonese-Speaking Prelingually Hearing-Impaired Children with Cochlear Implants , 2004, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[38]  C A van Hasselt,et al.  Cantonese tone perception ability of cochlear implant children in comparison with normal-hearing children. , 2002, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[39]  Ning Zhou,et al.  Musical pitch and lexical tone perception with cochlear implants , 2011, International journal of audiology.

[40]  R. Ritsma Frequencies dominant in the perception of the pitch of complex sounds. , 1966, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  William M. Rabinowitz,et al.  Better speech recognition with cochlear implants , 1991, Nature.