Back

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.

2025-12-04 otolaryngology
10.64898/2025.12.03.25341217 medRxiv
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 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Ear & Hearing
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.7%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 11%
17.6%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 18%
6.3%
4
Hearing Research
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.9%
6
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.9%
7
Applied Sciences
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
9
Trends in Hearing
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
10
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.6%
11
Neuroscience Research
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
12
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.1%
13
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.7%
14
Cells
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
15
ACS Chemical Neuroscience
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
16
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
18
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
19
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
20
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.5%
21
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.5%
22
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
23
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
24
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.5%
25
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%