Changes in Pitch with a Cochlear Implant Over Time

In the normal auditory system, the perceived pitch of a tone is closely linked to the cochlear place of vibration. It has generally been assumed that high-rate electrical stimulation by a cochlear implant electrode also evokes a pitch sensation corresponding to the electrode’s cochlear place (“place” code) and stimulation rate (“temporal” code). However, other factors may affect electric pitch sensation, such as a substantial loss of nearby nerve fibers or even higher-level perceptual changes due to experience. The goals of this study were to measure electric pitch sensations in hybrid (short-electrode) cochlear implant patients and to examine which factors might contribute to the perceived pitch. To look at effects of experience, electric pitch sensations were compared with acoustic tone references presented to the non-implanted ear at various stages of implant use, ranging from hookup to 5 years. Here, we show that electric pitch perception often shifts in frequency, sometimes by as much as two octaves, during the first few years of implant use. Additional pitch measurements in more recently implanted patients at shorter time intervals up to 1 year of implant use suggest two likely contributions to these observed pitch shifts: intersession variability (up to one octave) and slow, systematic changes over time. We also found that the early pitch sensations for a constant electrode location can vary greatly across subjects and that these variations are strongly correlated with speech reception performance. Specifically, patients with an early low-pitch sensation tend to perform poorly with the implant compared to those with an early high-pitch sensation, which may be linked to less nerve survival in the basal end of the cochlea in the low-pitch patients. In contrast, late pitch sensations show no correlation with speech perception. These results together suggest that early pitch sensations may more closely reflect peripheral innervation patterns, while later pitch sensations may reflect higher-level, experience-dependent changes. These pitch shifts over time not only raise questions for strict place-based theories of pitch perception, but also imply that experience may have a greater influence on cochlear implant perception than previously thought.

[1]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Deniz Başkent,et al.  Frequency-place compression and expansion in cochlear implant listeners. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Darren M. Whiten,et al.  Histopathology of human cochlear implants: Correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures , 2005, Hearing Research.

[4]  F B Simmons,et al.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. , 1966, Archives of otolaryngology.

[5]  R. Shannon Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics , 1983, Hearing Research.

[6]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of Electrode Impedance, the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, and Behavioral Measures in Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant Users , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[7]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Auditory Training with Spectrally Shifted Speech: Implications for Cochlear Implant Patient Auditory Rehabilitation , 2005, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[8]  M. Dorman,et al.  Simulating the effect of cochlear-implant electrode insertion depth on speech understanding. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Simulations of tonotopically mapped speech processors for cochlear implant electrodes varying in insertion depth. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

[11]  Summerfield Aq,et al.  Preoperative predictors of outcomes from cochlear implantation in adults: performance and quality of life. , 1995 .

[12]  G. van den Brink,et al.  Dichotic pitch fusion. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  L Whitford,et al.  Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. , 1996, Audiology & neuro-otology.

[14]  Paul R. Kileny,et al.  Effects of Preoperative Electrical Stimulability and Historical Factors on Performance with Multichannel Cochlear Implant , 1991, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[15]  Graeme M. Clark,et al.  Pitch comparisons of acoustically and electrically evoked auditory sensations , 1996, Hearing Research.

[16]  Marco Pelizzone,et al.  Acoustic to Electric Pitch Comparisons in Cochlear Implant Subjects with Residual Hearing , 2006, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[17]  Bruce J. Gantz,et al.  Combining acoustic and electric hearing: Simulations and real‐patient results , 2000 .

[18]  D. Buonomano,et al.  Cortical plasticity: from synapses to maps. , 1998, Annual review of neuroscience.

[19]  A. Faulkner,et al.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Chris James,et al.  Contralateral Masking in Cochlear Implant Users with Residual Hearing in the Non-Implanted Ear , 2001, Audiology and Neurotology.

[21]  Robert V. Shannon,et al.  Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction , 1983, Hearing Research.

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

[23]  P J Abbas,et al.  Multivariate Predictors of Audiological Success with Multichannel Cochlear Implants , 1993, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[24]  C. Turner,et al.  Combining acoustic and electrical hearing , 2003 .

[25]  Bruce J Gantz,et al.  Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  E. Knudsen Instructed learning in the auditory localization pathway of the barn owl , 2002, Nature.

[27]  P J Blamey,et al.  Psychophysical studies for two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  D. D. Greenwood A cochlear frequency-position function for several species--29 years later. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  A. Summerfield,et al.  Preoperative predictors of outcomes from cochlear implantation in adults: performance and quality of life. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[30]  C W Turner,et al.  Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  R. Shannon,et al.  Effects of electrode configuration and frequency allocation on vowel recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[32]  M F Dorman,et al.  The pitch of electrically presented sinusoids. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  D. Irvine,et al.  Plasticity of spectral processing. , 2005, International review of neurobiology.

[34]  E M Burns,et al.  Pure-tone pitch anomalies. II. Pitch-intensity effects and diplacusis in impaired ears. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  Donald K. Eddington,et al.  Histopathology of Cochlear Implants in Humans , 2001, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[36]  R. D. Knight Diplacusis, hearing threshold and otoacoustic emissions in an episode of sudden, unilateral cochlear hearing loss , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[37]  W. Dobelle,et al.  Auditory Prostheses Research with Multiple Channel Intracochlear Stimulation in Man , 1978, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

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

[39]  R. Shannon,et al.  Recognition of spectrally degraded and frequency-shifted vowels in acoustic and electric hearing. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  W. Parkinson,et al.  Residual speech recognition and cochlear implant performance: effects of implantation criteria. , 1999, The American journal of otology.