Place and temporal cues in pitch perception: are they truly independent?

McKay, Colette M.; McDermott, Hugh J.; Carlyon, Robert P.

doi:10.1121/1.1318742

Cited by 80 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is in contrast to previous direct measures of nerve survival in human temporal bones of cochlear implant recipients which have shown little or negative correlation of nerve fiber survival with speech performance (Nadol et al 2001;Khan et al 2005). The previous lack of correlation may be due to the greater heterogeneity of the traditional implant recipient groups included in these previous studies; these recipients not only have different devices and processing strategies, but also most likely include both pre-and post-lingually deafened individuals.…”

Section: Correlations With Speech Reception and Nerve Survivalcontrasting

confidence: 93%

“…Electric-alone speech recognition performance was also broken down by place, manner, and voicing cues (Miller and Nicely 1955). As with the total speech scores, Figure 10 shows that these scores were significantly correlated with early pitch sensations for all three cues.…”

Section: Acoustic To Electric Pitch Matchesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Previous studies of traditional cochlear implants have not found correlations between nerve survival and speech perception (Nadol et al 2001;Khan et al 2005), but the hybrid implant may differ in that it is more localized, and local nerve survival may be relatively more important for this type of implant than other factors. Specifically, greater local nerve survival in the cochlear base would presumably mean more discrete stimulation of nearby neurons by individual electrodes, leading to better speech discrimination performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Previous pitch-ranking studies in traditional cochlear implant users have indicated that both electrode location (place pitch cues) and stimulation rate (temporal pitch cues) can influence the perceived pitch (e.g., Tong et al 1982;Shannon 1983;Townshend et al 1987;McKay et al 2000). For instance, a more basal electrode will elicit a higher pitch than a more apical one, and a higher stimulation rate will elicit a higher pitch than a lower rate, up to around 300 Hz where the rate pitch cue saturates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Changes in Pitch with a Cochlear Implant Over Time

Reiss

Turner

Erenberg

et al. 2007

JARO

139

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 highrate electrical stimulation by a cochlear implant electrode also evokes a pitch sensation corresponding to the electrode_s cochlear place (Bplaceĉ ode) and stimulation rate (Btemporal^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.

show abstract

Section: Correlations With Speech Reception and Nerve Survivalcontrasting

confidence: 93%

Section: Acoustic To Electric Pitch Matchesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Changes in Pitch with a Cochlear Implant Over Time

Reiss

Turner

Erenberg

et al. 2007

JARO

139

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The filtering eliminated spectral cues that might have been produced by resolved harmonics, thus, the subjects were forced to use only temporal cues to perform the task. Further experiments by McKay et al (2000) showed that pulse rate and place of stimulation cues were perceptually independent for CI listeners. The work of McKay and colleagues suggests that the tonotopic and temporal features of stimuli might be independently processed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Across- and Within-Channel Envelope Interactions in Cochlear Implant Listeners

Chatterjee

Oba

2004

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of modulated maskers on detection thresholds of a 50-Hz sinusoidal amplitude modulation (SAM) in a signal carrier were measured in nine cochlear implant (CI) listeners as a function of masker envelope type and for different masker-signal electrode separations. Both signal and masker were 200-ms-long pulse trains, presented concurrently in an interleaved stimulation mode. Masker envelopes were SAM at 20, 50, (0-and p-phase re: the signal modulator), and 125 Hz, as well as noise amplitude modulated (NAM), all with a fixed 20% modulation depth. Comparisons were made against steady-state maskers that had an amplitude equal to the mean amplitude of the modulated maskers or to their peak amplitude (SS peak ). Modulation thresholds were larger in the presence of the dynamic maskers versus the SS peak maskers; however, there was significant intersubject variability in the pattern of results. Effects of relative phase between masker and signal were not consistent across subjects. Envelope masking (the dB difference in modulation detection thresholds between modulated and SS peak maskers) was generally larger for the lower-modulation-frequency maskers than the 125-Hz masker. The spatial distribution of masked modulation detection thresholds was found to be considerably different from spatial forwardmasking patterns obtained in the same subjects. Finally, modulation thresholds measured for a very wide separation between the masker and signal showed significant envelope masking. These results suggest that, as has been shown in acoustic stimulation, central, across-channel temporal processing mechanisms also occur in electrical stimulation.

show abstract

References

2007

Cochlear Hearing Loss

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Place and temporal cues in pitch perception: are they truly independent?

Cited by 80 publications

References 12 publications

Changes in Pitch with a Cochlear Implant Over Time

Changes in Pitch with a Cochlear Implant Over Time

Across- and Within-Channel Envelope Interactions in Cochlear Implant Listeners

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About