The role of temporal cues on voluntary stream segregation in cochlear implant users
Cochlear implant (CI) listeners experience difficulties in complex listening scenarios, where the auditory system is required to segregate a target signal from the competing sound sources. The present study investigated segregation abilities of CI listeners as a function of temporal cues and examined whether a two-stream percept occurs instantaneously or needs time to build up. CI users participated in a detection task where a sequence of regularly presented bursts of pulses (“B”) on a single electrode interleaved with an irregular sequence (“A”) presented on the same electrode with a different pulse rate. The pulse rate difference and the duration of the sequences were varied between trials. In half of the trials, a delay was added to the last burst of the regular A sequence and the listeners were asked to detect this delay. As the period between consecutive B bursts was jittered, time judgments between the A and B sequences did not provide a reliable cue to perform the task such that the segregation of A and B should improve performance. The results showed that performance improved with increasing rate differences and increasing sequence duration, suggesting that CI listeners can segregate sounds based on temporal cues and that this percept builds up over time.
Bregman, A.S. (1990). Auditory Scene Analysis : The Perceptual Organization of Sound. The MIT Press.
Böckmann-Barthel, M., Deike, S., Brechmann, A., Ziese, M., and Verhey, J.L. (2014). “Time course of auditory streaming: do CI users differ from normal-hearing listeners?” Front. Psychol., 5, 775. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00775
Carlyon, R.P. (2004). “How the brain separates sounds,” Trends Cogn. Sci., 8, 465-471. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.008
Chatterjee, M., Sarampalis, A., and Oba, S.I. (2006). “Auditory stream segregation with cochlear implants: A preliminary report,” Hear. Res., 222, 100-107. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2006.09.001
Cooper, H.R., and Roberts, B. (2007). “Auditory stream segregation of tone sequences in cochlear implant listeners,” Hear. Res., 225, 11-24. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2006.11.010
Cooper, H.R., and Roberts, B. (2009). “Auditory stream segregation in cochlear implant listeners: measures based on temporal discrimination and interleaved melody recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 126, 1975-1987. doi: 10.1121/1.3203210
Duran, S.I., Collins, L.M., and Throckmorton, C.S. (2012). “Stream segregation on a single electrode as a function of pulse rate in cochlear implant listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 132, 3849-3855. doi: 10.1121/1.4764875
Grimault, N., Bacon, S.P., and Micheyl, C. (2002). “Auditory stream segregation on the basis of amplitude-modulation rate,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 111, 1340-1348. doi: 10.1121/1.1452740
Hong, R.S., and Turner, C.W. (2006). “Pure-tone auditory stream segregation and speech perception in noise in cochlear implant recipients,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 120, 360-374. doi: 10.1121/1.2204450
Hong, R.S., and Turner, C.W. (2009). “Sequential stream segregation using temporal periodicity cues in cochlear implant recipients,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 126, 291-299. doi: 10.1121/1.3140592
Kuznetsova, A., Christensen, R.H.B., Bavay, C., and Brockhoff, P.B. (2015). “Automated mixed ANOVA modeling of sensory and consumer data,” Food Qual. Prefer., 40, 31-38. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.08.004
Landsberger, D.M., Vermeire, K., Claes, A., Van Rompaey, V., and Van de Heyning, P. (2016). “Qualities of single electrode stimulation as a function of rate and place of stimulation with a cochlear implant. Ear Hearing, 37, e149-e159. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000250
Micheyl, C., and Oxenham, A.J. (2010). “Objective and subjective psychophysical measures of auditory stream integration and segregation,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 11, 709-724. doi: 10.1007/s10162-010-0227-2
Moore, B.C.J., and Gockel, H.E. (2012). “Properties of auditory stream formation,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 367, 919-931. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0355
Nie, Y., Zhang, Y., and Nelson, P.B. (2014). “Auditory stream segregation using bandpass noises: evidence from event-related potentials,” Front. Neurosci., 8, 1-12. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00277
Nie, Y., and Nelson, P. (2015). “Auditory stream segregation using amplitude modulated bandpass noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 127, 1809. doi: 10.1121/1.3384104
Roberts, B., Glasberg, B.R., and Moore, B.C.J. (2002). “Primitive stream segregation of tone sequences without differences in fundamental frequency or passband,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 112, 2074-2085. doi: 10.1121/1.1508784
Roberts, B., Glasberg, B.R., and Moore, B.C.J. (2008). “Effects of the build-up and resetting of auditory stream segregation on temporal discrimination,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., 34, 992-1006. doi: 10.1037/0096-15188.8.131.522
Tejani, V.D., Schvartz-Leyzac, K.C., and Chatterjee, M. (2017). “Sequential stream segregation in normally-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 141, 50-64. doi: 10.1121/1.4973516
Van Noorden, L.P.A.S. (1975). Temporal Coherence in the Perception of Tone Sequences. Institute for Perceptual Research.
Vliegen, J., Moore, B.C.J., and Oxenham, A.J. (1999). “The role of spectral and periodicity cues in auditory stream segregation, measured using a temporal discrimination task,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 106, 938-945. doi: 10.1121/1.427140
Vliegen, J., and Oxenham, A J. (1999). “Sequential stream segregation in the absence of spectral cues,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 105, 339-346. doi: 10.1121/1.424503
Zeng, F.G., Rebscher, S., Harrison, W., Sun, X., and Feng, H. (2008). “Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation,” IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng., 1, 115-142. doi: 10.1109/RBME.2008.2008250
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.