Across-frequency combination of interaural time difference in bilateral cochlear implant listeners

The current study examined how cochlear implant (CI) listeners combine temporally interleaved envelope-ITD information across two sites of stimulation. When two cochlear sites jointly transmit ITD information, one possibility is that CI listeners can extract the most reliable ITD cues available. As a result, ITD sensitivity would be sustained or enhanced compared to single-site stimulation. Alternatively, mutual interference across multiple sites of ITD stimulation could worsen dual-site performance compared to listening to the better of two electrode pairs. Two experiments used direct stimulation to examine how CI users can integrate ITDs across two pairs of electrodes. Experiment 1 tested ITD discrimination for two stimulation sites using 100-Hz sinusoidally modulated 1000-pps-carrier pulse trains. Experiment 2 used the same stimuli ramped with 100 ms windows, as a control condition with minimized onset cues. For all stimuli, performance improved monotonically with increasing modulation depth. Results show that when CI listeners are stimulated with electrode pairs at two cochlear sites, sensitivity to ITDs was similar to that seen when only the electrode pair with better sensitivity was activated. None of the listeners showed a decrement in performance from the worse electrode pair. This could be achieved either by listening to the better electrode pair or by truly integrating the information across cochlear sites.

[1]  Alan Kan,et al.  Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Becky B. Poon,et al.  Sensitivity to interaural time difference with bilateral cochlear implants: Development over time and effect of interaural electrode spacing. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  R. Carlyon,et al.  Combining information across frequency regions in fundamental frequency discrimination. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  R. Litovsky,et al.  Interaural Time-Delay Sensitivity in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users: Effects of Pulse Rate, Modulation Rate, and Place of Stimulation , 2009, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[5]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  Comparing the effect of pause duration on threshold interaural time differences between exponential and squared-sine envelopes (L). , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  D T Lawson,et al.  Bilateral cochlear implants controlled by a single speech processor. , 1998, The American journal of otology.

[7]  Bernhard Laback,et al.  Sensitivity to Interaural Level and Envelope Time Differences of Two Bilateral Cochlear Implant Listeners Using Clinical Sound Processors , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[8]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  The influence of different segments of the ongoing envelope on sensitivity to interaural time delays. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  R. V. Hoesel,et al.  Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users. , 2007 .

[10]  Observer weighting of level and timing cues in bilateral cochlear implant users , 2008 .

[11]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Binaural masking level differences in actual and simulated bilateral cochlear implant listeners. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  R. Litovsky,et al.  Interaural Level Differences Do Not Suffice for Restoring Spatial Release from Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Listening , 2012, PloS one.

[13]  E R Hafter,et al.  Detection of interaural differences of intensity in trains of high-frequency clicks as a function of interclick interval and number. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  T. Houtgast,et al.  A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria , 1985 .

[15]  Richard J. M. van Hoesel,et al.  Contrasting benefits from contralateral implants and hearing aids in cochlear implant users , 2012, Hearing Research.

[16]  Anthony J Watkins,et al.  Perceptual compensation for effects of reverberation in speech identification. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  Effect of age at onset of deafness on binaural sensitivity in electric hearing in humans. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  R. V. van Hoesel,et al.  Observer weighting of level and timing cues in bilateral cochlear implant users. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Virginia Best,et al.  Binaural interference in bilateral cochlear-implant listeners. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Aaron Parkinson,et al.  Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Multicenter Clinical Study , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[21]  Dennis McFadden,et al.  Lateralization at high frequencies , 1975 .

[22]  A new approach to comparing binaural masking level differences at low and high frequencies , 1997 .

[23]  B. Seeber,et al.  Localization cues with bilateral cochlear implants. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  D. Eddington,et al.  Sensitivity of bilateral cochlear implant users to fine-structure and envelope interaural time differences. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  R. W. Hukin,et al.  Auditory objects of attention: the role of interaural time differences. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  Julie Arenberg Bierer,et al.  Probing the Electrode-Neuron Interface With Focused Cochlear Implant Stimulation , 2010, Trends in amplification.

[27]  Yi Hu,et al.  Speech recognition by bilateral cochlear implant users in a cocktail-party setting. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  B. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Effect of source spectrum on sound localization in an everyday reverberant room. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  S. Klein,et al.  Measuring, estimating, and understanding the psychometric function: A commentary , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  E R Hafter,et al.  Detection of interaural differences of time in trains of high-frequency clicks as a function of interclick interval and number. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  David M Landsberger,et al.  Perceptual differences between low and high rates of stimulation on single electrodes for cochlear implantees. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Effect of stimulus spectrum on distance perception for nearby sources. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  Barbara Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Spatial Selective Auditory Attention in the Presence of Reverberant Energy: Individual Differences in Normal-Hearing Listeners , 2011, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[34]  D. McFadden,et al.  Lateralization of high frequencies based on interaural time differences. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  R. Tyler,et al.  Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Effects of envelope shape on interaural envelope delay sensitivity in acoustic and electric hearing. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Alan Kan,et al.  Studies on bilateral cochlear implants at the University of Wisconsin's Binaural Hearing and Speech Laboratory. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[38]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  Spatial Hearing and Speech Intelligibility in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users , 2009, Ear and hearing.

[39]  S van de Par,et al.  A new approach to comparing binaural masking level differences at low and high frequencies. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Leslie R Bernstein,et al.  Lateralization produced by envelope-based interaural temporal disparities of high-frequency, raised-sine stimuli: empirical data and modeling. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Binaural jitter improves interaural time-difference sensitivity of cochlear implantees at high pulse rates , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[42]  Frederick J. Gallun,et al.  The advantage of knowing where to listen. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.