Covarying Amplitude Modulation and Pulse Rate Enhances Pitch Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Users
Li, H.; Zhou, H.; Pang, L.; Li, J.; Wei, C.; Wu, P.; Meng, Q.; Zeng, X.
Show abstract
Pitch plays a fundamental role in prosody, lexical tone, and music perception, yet cochlear implant (CI) users exhibit limited temporal pitch sensitivity, particularly at higher pulse rates (e.g., 300 Hz). This study proposes a covarying pitch-encoding method, where the amplitude-modulation (AM) frequency and the pulse rate vary together in predetermined integer ratios to reinforce temporal periodicity cues. A single-channel psychophysical pitch discrimination experiment was conducted at the most apical electrode in 17 ears from 14 Cochlear CI users around reference frequencies of 50 and 300 Hz. The aims were to examine the effects of the integer ratio on pitch discrimination using the covarying method and to compare the performance of the covarying method with two conventional pitch encoding methods--pulse rate only and AM only. An additional consonant recognition task evaluated speech recognition ability. Results showed that at 50 Hz neither integer ratio nor pitch encoding method significantly affected pitch discrimination thresholds ({approx}30%). At 300 Hz, thresholds were overall higher than at 50 Hz, but the covarying method produced lower thresholds (41.8%) than the pulse rate (52.1%) and AM frequency methods (52.4%), and the covarying-pulse-rate difference was statistically significant. These results suggest that covarying stimulation can modestly enhance pitch discrimination at higher frequencies relative to conventional methods. Regression analyses revealed that temporal pitch discrimination in this psychophysical task at 50 Hz deteriorated with longer CI experience, whereas consonant recognition in a more ecologically relevant speech task improved, suggesting distinct neural adaptation mechanisms.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Reducing interaural tonotopic mismatch preserves binaural unmasking in cochlear implant simulations of single-sided deafness 98%
- Magnified interaural level differences enhance spatial release from masking in bilateral cochlear implant users 97%
- Intrasubject variability in Potential Early Markers of Sensorineural Hearing Damage 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- The relationship between electrophysiological measures of the electrically evoked compound action potential and cochlear implant speech perception outcomes 97%
- Relationships between the auditory nerve’s ability to recover from neural adaptation, cortical encoding of and perceptual sensitivity to within-channel temporal gaps in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant users 97%
- A level adjusted cochlear frequency-to-place map for estimating tonotopic frequency mismatch with a cochlear implant 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- From Modulated Noise to Natural Speech: the Effect of Stimulus Parameters on the Frequency Following Response 97%
- The Audible Contrast Threshold (ACT™) test: a clinical spectro-temporal modulation detection test 97%
- Speech in noise performance in adults with cochlear implants using a combined channel deactivation strategy with a variable number of dynamic focused channels 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Reaction time sensitivity to spectrotemporal modulations of sound 96%
- Visually-biased perception in cochlear implant users: a study of the McGurk and sound-induced flash illusions 96%
- Towards personalized auditory models: predicting individual sensorineural-hearing-loss profiles from recorded human auditory physiology 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits in listeners with various hearing abilities: The BEAR test battery 97%
- Electromyographic Correlates of Effortful Listening in the Vestigial Auriculomotor System 96%
- Neural correlates of masked and unmasked tones: psychoacoustics and late auditory evoked potentials (LAEPs) 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.