Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modulation Enhancement in the Electrical Signal Improves Perception of Interaural Time Differences with Bimodal Stimulation

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Interaural timing cues are important for sound source localization and for binaural unmasking of speech that is spatially separated from interfering sounds. Users of a cochlear implant (CI) with residual hearing in the non-implanted ear (bimodal listeners) can only make very limited use of interaural timing cues with their clinical devices. Previous studies showed that bimodal listeners can be sensitive to interaural time differences (ITDs) for simple single- and three-channel stimuli. The modulation enhancement strategy (MEnS) was developed to improve the ITD perception of bimodal listeners. It enhances temporal modulations on all stimulated electrodes, synchronously with modulations in the acoustic signal presented to the non-implanted ear, based on measurement of the amplitude peaks occurring at the rate of the fundamental frequency in voiced phonemes. In the first experiment, ITD detection thresholds were measured using the method of constant stimuli for five bimodal listeners for an artificial vowel, processed with either the advanced combination encoder (ACE) strategy or with MEnS. With MEnS, detection thresholds were significantly lower, and for four subjects well within the physically relevant range. In the second experiment, the extent of lateralization was measured in three subjects with both strategies, and ITD sensitivity was determined using an adaptive procedure. All subjects could lateralize sounds based on ITD and sensitivity was significantly better with MEnS than with ACE. The current results indicate that ITD cues can be provided to bimodal listeners with modified sound processing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 6
FIG. 7
FIG. 8
FIG. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://bootstrap-software.org/psignifit/

Abbreviations

CI:

Cochlear implant

F0:

Fundamental frequency

HA:

Hearing aid

ILD:

Interaural level difference

ITD:

Interaural time difference

JND:

Just noticeable difference

MEnS:

Modulation enhancement strategy

NH:

Normal hearing

References

  • Akeroyd M (2003) Threshold differences for interaural time delays carried by double vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 114(4 Pt 1):2167–2177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Akeroyd M (2006) The psychoacoustics of binaural hearing. Int J Audiol 45(Suppl 1):25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein L, Trahiotis C (2002) Enhancing sensitivity to interaural delays at high frequencies by using “transposed stimuli”. J Acoust Soc Am 112(3 Pt 1):1026–1036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein L, Trahiotis C (2009) How sensitivity to ongoing interaural temporal disparities is affected by manipulations of temporal features of the envelopes of high-frequency stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 125(5):3234–3242

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein L, Trahiotis C (2010) Accounting quantitatively for sensitivity to envelope-based interaural temporal disparities at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 128(3):1224–1234

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma P, Weenink D (2001) Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot Int 5(9/10):341–345

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronkhorst A (2000) The cocktail party phenomenon: a review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Act Acust 86(6):117–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Buell T, Griffin S, Bernstein L (2008) Listeners’ sensitivity to “onset/offset” and “ongoing” interaural delays in high-frequency, sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones. J Acoust Soc Am 123:279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ching T, van Wanrooy E, Dillon H (2007) Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: a review. Trends Amplif 11(3):161–192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colburn H, Shinn-Cunningham B, Kidd G, Durlach N (2006) The perceptual consequences of binaural hearing. Int J Audiol 45(Suppl 1):34–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domnitz R (1973) The interaural time JND as a simultaneous function of interaural time and interaural amplitude. J Acoust Soc Am 53(6):1549–1552

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ewert S, Dietz M, Klein-Hennig M, Hohmann V (2009) Advances in auditory physiology, psychophysics and models; the role of envelope wave form, adaptation, and attacks in binaural perception. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Francart T, McDermott H (2012a) Development of a loudness normalisation strategy for combined cochlear implant and acoustic stimulation. Hear Res 294(1–2):114–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francart T, McDermott H (2012b) Speech perception and localisation with SCORE bimodal: a loudness normalisation strategy for combined cochlear implant and hearing aid stimulation. Plos One 7(10)

  • Francart T, van Wieringen A, Wouters J (2008) APEX 3: a multi-purpose test platform for auditory psychophysical experiments. J Neurosci Methods 172(2):283–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francart T, Brokx J, Wouters J (2009) Sensitivity to interaural time differences with combined cochlear implant and acoustic stimulation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 10(1):131–141

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francart T, Lenssen A, Wouters J (2011) Sensitivity of bimodal listeners to interaural time differences with modulated single- and multiple-channel stimuli. Audiol Neurootol 16(2):82–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francart T, Lenssen A, Wouters J (2012) The effect of interaural differences in envelope shape on the perceived location of sounds. J Acoust Soc Am 132(2):611–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freyman RL, Zurek PM, Balakrishnan U, Chiang YC (1997) Onset dominance in lateralization. J Acoust Soc Am 101(3):1649–1659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grantham D, Ashmead D, Ricketts T, Haynes D, Labadie R (2008) Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using cis processing. Ear Hear 29(1):33–44

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Green T, Faulkner A, Rosen S (2004) Enhancing temporal cues to voice pitch in continuous interleaved sampling cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 116(4 Pt 1):2298–2310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Henning G (1974) Detectability of interaural delay in high-frequency complex waveforms. J Acoust Soc Am 55(1):84–90

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ISO 389-2 (1994) ISO 389-2 reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment—part 2: reference equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for pure tones and insert earphones

  • Klatt D (1980) Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. J Acoust Soc Am 67(3):971–995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunov H, Abel S (1981) Effects of rise/decay time on the lateralization of interaurally delayed 1-khz tones. J Acoust Soc Am 69(3):769–773

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laback B, Pok S, Baumgartner W, Deutsch W, Schmid K (2004) Sensitivity to interaural level and envelope time differences of two bilateral cochlear implant listeners using clinical sound processors. Ear Hear 25(5):488–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laback B, Majdak P, Baumgartner W (2007) Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 121(4):2182–2191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laback B, Zimmerman I, Majdak P, Baumgartner W, Pok S (2011) Effects of envelope shape on interaural envelope delay sensitivity in acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 130(3):1515–1529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laneau J, Wouters J, Moonen M (2006) Improved music perception with explicit pitch coding in cochlear implants. Audiol Neurotol 11(1):38–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson D, Wilson B, Zerbi M, van den Honert C, Finley C, Farmer J Jr, McElveen J Jr, Roush P (1998) Bilateral cochlear implants controlled by a single speech processor. Am J Otol 19(6):758–761

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lenssen A, Francart T, Brokx J, Wouters J (2011) Bimodal listeners are not sensitive to interaural time differences in unmodulated low-frequency stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 129(6):3457–3460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Litovsky R, Jones G, Agrawal S, van Hoesel R (2010) Effect of age at onset of deafness on binaural sensitivity in electric hearing in humans. J Acoust Soc Am 127(1):400–414

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Litovsky R, Goupell M, Godar S, Grieco-Calub T, Garadat S, Agrawal S, van Hoesel R (2012) Studies on bilateral cochlear implants at the University of Wisconsin’s Binaural Hearing and Speech Laboratory. J Am Acad Audiol 23(1):476–494

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Long C, Eddington D, Colburn H, Rabinowitz W (2003) Binaural sensitivity as a function of interaural electrode position with a bilateral cochlear implant user. J Acoust Soc Am 114(3):1565–1574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Majdak P, Laback B, Baumgartner W (2006) Effects of interaural time differences in fine structure and envelope on lateral discrimination in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 120(4):2190–2201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott H, McKay C, Vandali A (1992) A new portable sound processor for the University of Melbourne/nucleus limited multielectrode cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am 91(6):3367–3371

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milczynski M, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2009) Improved fundamental frequency coding in cochlear implant signal processing. J Acoust Soc Am 125(4):2260–2271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milczynski M, Chang JE, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2012) Perception of Mandarin Chinese with cochlear implants using enhanced temporal pitch cues. Hear Res 285(1–2):1–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sayers B (1964) Acoustic-image lateralization judgments with binaural tones. J Acoust Soc Am 36(5):923–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senn P, Kompis M, Vischer M, Haeusler R (2005) Minimum audible angle, just noticeable interaural differences and speech intelligibility with bilateral cochlear implants using clinical speech processors. Audiol Neurootol 10(6):342–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson B (2008) Pitch perception with cochlear implants. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Melbourne

  • van Hoesel R (2004) Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 9(4):234–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Hoesel R (2007) Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 121(4):2192–2206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Hoesel R, Tyler R (2003) Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 113(3):1617–1630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandali AE, van Hoesel RJ (2011) Development of a temporal fundamental frequency coding strategy for cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 129(6):4023–4036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandali A, Whitford L, Plant K, Clark G (2000) Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear 21(6):608–624

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandali A, Sucher C, Tsang D, McKay C, Chew J, McDermott H (2005) Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: a comparison of sound-processing strategies. J Acoust Soc Am 117(5):3126–3138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wichmann F, Hill N (2001) The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Percept Psychophys 63(8):1314–1329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to our test subjects, who inexhaustibly and enthusiastically participated in numerous test sessions, listening to the same sounds over and over again. We thank Prof. Hugh McDermott for his useful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This research was supported by IWT-Vlaanderen and Cochlear, project 110722. Tom Francart was sponsored by a Post Doctoral Mandate (BOF) from the KU Leuven, a Post Doctoral Fellowship of the Fund for Scientific Research of the Flemish Government and a Marie Curie International Outgoing Fellowship of the European Commission, grant agreement number PIOF-GA-2009-252730. Anneke Lenssen was sponsored by the EU-ITN project AUDIS, grant agreement number PITN-GA-2008-214699. We thank the staff of the audiology department of the hospital of Maastricht, the audiology center of Eindhoven, and the hospital of Leuven for their kind cooperation and flexibility.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KU Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, ExpORL, O&N2, Herestraat 49 Bus 721, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Tom Francart, Anneke Lenssen & Jan Wouters

Authors
  1. Tom Francart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anneke Lenssen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Wouters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Francart.

Additional information

Tom Francart and Anneke Lenssen contributed equally to this study and should be regarded as joint first authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Francart, T., Lenssen, A. & Wouters, J. Modulation Enhancement in the Electrical Signal Improves Perception of Interaural Time Differences with Bimodal Stimulation. JARO 15, 633–647 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-014-0457-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-014-0457-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation