Pitch Matching Adapts Even for Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users with Relatively Small Initial Pitch Differences Across the Ears

Aronoff, Justin M.; Staisloff, Hannah E.; Kirchner, Abbigail; Lee, Daniel H.; Stelmach, Julia

doi:10.1007/s10162-019-00733-3

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may have been expected, but when relating either of these two methods with the contacts that result in matched pitch, there can be an offset, and the correlation is weak . The latter supports the assumption that place-pitch is plastic (Aronoff et al, 2019;Reiss et al, 2011), but especially in the post-lingually deaf, the inputs to binaural neurons are considered to be tonotopically hardwired, i.e., not subject to plastic changes. Data from SSD-CI users also appears to agree with this assumption (Bernstein et al, 2018).…”

Section: Causes Of Frequency Mismatchsupporting

confidence: 76%

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When listening with a cochlear implant through one ear and acoustically through the other, binaural benefits and spatial hearing abilities are generally poorer than in other bilaterally stimulated configurations. With the working hypothesis that binaural neurons require interaurally matched inputs, we review causes for mismatch, their perceptual consequences, and experimental methods for mismatch measurements. The focus is on the three primary interaural dimensions of latency, frequency, and level. Often, the mismatch is not constant, but rather highly stimulus-dependent. We report on mismatch compensation strategies, taking into consideration the specific needs of the respective patient groups. Practical challenges typically faced by audiologists in the proposed fitting procedure are discussed. While improvement in certain areas (e.g., speaker localization) is definitely achievable, a more comprehensive mismatch compensation is a very ambitious endeavor. Even in the hypothetical ideal fitting case, performance is not expected to exceed that of a good bilateral cochlear implant user.

show abstract

Section: Causes Of Frequency Mismatchsupporting

confidence: 76%

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the auditory system exhibits central plasticity following peripheral changes stemming from hearing loss and CIs (Fallon et al, 2009), it is unclear if the adult human binaural system is sufficiently plastic to overcome interaural place mismatch (Kan et al, 2013Reiss et al, 2014Reiss et al, , 2015Aronoff et al, 2016Aronoff et al, , 2019. Other aspects of spatial auditory perception might be more readily rectified by plasticity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilateral cochlear implants (BI-CIs) or a CI for single-sided deafness (SSD-CI; one normally functioning acoustic ear) can partially restore spatial-hearing abilities, including sound localization and speech understanding in noise. For these populations, however, interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch can occur and thus diminish binaural sensitivity that relies on interaurally frequency-matched neurons. This study examined whether plasticity-reorganization of central neural pathways over time-can compensate for peripheral interaural place mismatch. We hypothesized differential plasticity across two systems: none for binaural processing but adaptation for pitch perception toward frequencies delivered by the specific electrodes. Interaural place mismatch was evaluated in 19 BI-CI and 23 SSD-CI human subjects (both sexes) using binaural processing (interaural-time-difference discrimination with simultaneous bilateral stimulation), pitch perception (pitch ranking for single electrodes or acoustic tones with sequential bilateral stimulation), and physical electrode-location estimates from computed-tomography (CT) scans. On average, CT scans revealed relatively little BI-CI interaural place mismatch (26°insertion-angle mismatch) but a relatively large SSD-CI mismatch, particularly at low frequencies (166°for an electrode tuned to 300 Hz, decreasing to 14°at 7000 Hz). For BI-CI subjects, the three metrics were in agreement because there was little mismatch. For SSD-CI subjects, binaural and CT measurements were in agreement, suggesting little binaural-system plasticity induced by mismatch. The pitch measurements disagreed with binaural and CT measurements, suggesting place-pitch plasticity or a procedural bias. These results suggest that reducing interaural place mismatch and potentially improving binaural processing by reprogramming the CI frequency allocation would be better done using CT-scan than pitch information.

show abstract

“…However, the small sample (N=7, one electrode per subject) precluded statistical assessment of these relationships and, without imaging data regarding electrode positions, these data provided only indirect evidence of a lack of binaural plasticity. While the auditory system exhibits central plasticity following peripheral changes stemming from hearing loss and CIs (Fallon et al, 2009), it is unclear if there is sufficient plasticity to overcome interaural place mismatch in adult humans (Kan et al 2013Reiss et al 2014Reiss et al , 2015Aronoff et al 2016Aronoff et al , 2019. Other dimensions of interaural mismatch might be more readily rectified by plasticity (e.g., King et al, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the auditory system exhibits central plasticity following peripheral changes stemming from hearing loss and CIs (Fallon et al, 2009), it is unclear if there is sufficient plasticity to overcome interaural place mismatch in adult humans (Kan et al 2013, 2015; Reiss et al 2014, 2015; Aronoff et al 2016, 2019). Other dimensions of interaural mismatch might be more readily rectified by plasticity (e.g., King et al ., 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch estimates using CT scans and binaural perception, but not pitch, are consistent in cochlear-implant users

Bernstein

Jensen

Stakhovskaya

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilateral cochlear implants (BI-CIs) or a CI for single-sided deafness (SSD; one normally functioning acoustic ear) can partially restore spatial-hearing abilities including sound localization and speech understanding when there are competing sounds. However for these populations, frequency information is not explicitly aligned across the ears, resulting in interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch. This diminishes spatial-hearing abilities because binaural encoding occurs in interaurally frequency-matched neurons. This study examined whether plasticity – the reorganization of central neural pathways over time – can compensate for peripheral interaural place mismatch. We hypothesized differential plasticity across two systems: none for binaural processing but adaptation toward the frequencies delivered by the specific electrodes for sequential pitch perception. Interaural place mismatch was evaluated in 43 human subjects (20 BI-CI and 23 SSD-CI, both sexes) using interaural-time-difference (ITD) discrimination (simultaneous bilateral stimulation), place-pitch ranking (sequential bilateral stimulation), and physical electrode-location estimates from computed-tomography (CT) scans. On average, CT scans revealed relatively little BI-CI interaural place mismatch (26° insertion-angle mismatch), but relatively large SSD-CI mismatch, particularly at the apical end of the array (166° for an electrode tuned to 300 Hz, decreasing to 14° at 7000 Hz). ITD and CT measurements were in agreement, suggesting little binaural-system plasticity to mismatch. The pitch measurements did not agree with the binaural and CT measurements, suggesting plasticity for pitch encoding or procedural biases. The combined results show that binaural processing may be optimized by using CT-scan information, but not pitch measurements, to program the CI frequency allocation to reduce interaural place mismatch.

show abstract

Pitch Matching Adapts Even for Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users with Relatively Small Initial Pitch Differences Across the Ears

Cited by 10 publications

References 26 publications

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users

Interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch estimates using CT scans and binaural perception, but not pitch, are consistent in cochlear-implant users

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About