Investigation of pitch discrimination and the effect of learning for virtual channels realized by current steering

Conclusion: As virtual channels could be perceived by the majority of implant users, they promise potential for advanced speech coding strategies, providing enhanced spectral resolution. An improvement in resolution was found from first stimulation up to 6 months afterwards. Objective: Independent current sources allow distribution of the current between adjacent electrode contacts in a defined ratio, thus steering the current. The goal of our study was to investigate a) whether all users were able to distinguish between adjacent physical channels, b) how many users could perceive a distinct pitch as the current was steered between two adjacent contacts and c) whether a learning effect was observed. Subjects and methods: A pitch ranking measurement was performed during an acute test session for a group of 39 cochlear implant users. The results were analysed with respect to the implanted electrode system. The learning process during the first 6 months after implantation was investigated for a selected subgroup. Results: About half of the study participants were able to perceive intermediate channels; 5% were able to discriminate more than eight intermediate channels, which correspond to half of the physical channels. A wide variation was found across the array.

[1]  H J McDermott,et al.  Pitch ranking with nonsimultaneous dual-electrode electrical stimulation of the cochlea. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Lucas H M Mens,et al.  Speech Perception with Mono- and Quadrupolar Electrode Configurations: A Crossover Study , 2005, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[3]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Evaluation of the Harmony Soundprocessor in Combination With the Speech Coding Strategy HiRes 120 , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[4]  Mark Downing,et al.  Current Steering Creates Additional Pitch Percepts in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients , 2007, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[5]  Chris van den Honert,et al.  Dual-electrode pitch discrimination with sequential interleaved stimulation by cochlear implant users. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  S. Staller,et al.  Speech perception abilities of adult and pediatric Nucleus implant recipients using the Spectral Peak (SPEAK) coding strategy. , 1997, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

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

[8]  Philipos C Loizou,et al.  Comparison of Speech Processing Strategies Used in the Clarion Implant Processor , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[9]  Marco Pelizzone,et al.  Electrical field interactions in different cochlear implant systems. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Current Steering and Results From Novel Speech Coding Strategies , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[11]  Gail S Donaldson,et al.  Place-pitch discrimination of single- versus dual-electrode stimuli by cochlear implant users (L). , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  A Psychoacoustic "NofM"-Type Speech Coding Strategy for Cochlear Implants , 2005, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[13]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Electrode ranking of "place pitch" and speech recognition in electrical hearing. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Johan H. M. Frijns,et al.  The consequences of neural degeneration regarding optimal cochlear implant position in scala tympani: A model approach , 2006, Hearing Research.

[15]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Coding of Sounds in the Auditory System and Its Relevance to Signal Processing and Coding in Cochlear Implants , 2003, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[16]  M. Pelizzone,et al.  Channel interactions with high-rate biphasic electrical stimulation in cochlear implant subjects , 2003, Hearing Research.

[17]  Philipos C. Loizou,et al.  Effects of electrode design and configuration on channel interactions , 2006, Hearing Research.

[18]  Paul J Abbas,et al.  Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode arrays. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.