Pitch ranking of complex tones by normally hearing subjects and cochlear implant users
- PMID: 17604582
- DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2007.05.002
Pitch ranking of complex tones by normally hearing subjects and cochlear implant users
Abstract
The ability of 10 normally hearing (NH) adults and eight cochlear implant (CI) users to pitch-rank pairs of complex tones was assessed. The acoustically presented stimuli differed in fundamental frequency (F0) by either one or six semitones (F0 range: 98 to 740 Hz). The NH group obtained significantly higher mean scores for both experiments: (NH: one semitone - 81.2%, six semitones - 89.0%; CI: one semitone - 49.0%, six semitones - 60.2%; p<0.001). Prior musical experience was found to be associated with higher pitch-ranking scores for the NH subjects. Those with musical experience ratings <3 obtained significantly lower scores for both interval sizes (p<0.001) than those with higher ratings. Nevertheless, the scores obtained by the musically inexperienced, NH adults were significantly higher than those obtained by the CI group for both the one-semitone (p=0.022) and six-semitone (p=0.018) intervals. These results suggest that the pitch information CI users obtain from their implant systems is less accurate than that obtained by NH listeners when listening to the same complex sounds. Furthermore, the relatively poor pitch-ranking ability of at least some CI users may be associated with a more-limited experience of music in general.
Similar articles
-
Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users.Ear Hear. 2008 Jun;29(3):421-34. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31816a0d0b. Ear Hear. 2008. PMID: 18344870
-
What breaks a melody: perceiving F0 and intensity sequences with a cochlear implant.Hear Res. 2010 Oct 1;269(1-2):34-41. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.07.007. Epub 2010 Jul 30. Hear Res. 2010. PMID: 20674733
-
The effect of cochlear implantation on music perception by adults with usable pre-operative acoustic hearing.Int J Audiol. 2008 May;47(5):257-68. doi: 10.1080/14992020801955237. Int J Audiol. 2008. PMID: 18465410 Clinical Trial.
-
Cochlear implant-mediated perception of music.Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Oct;14(5):337-40. doi: 10.1097/01.moo.0000244192.59184.bd. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006. PMID: 16974148 Review.
-
Pitch perception and auditory stream segregation: implications for hearing loss and cochlear implants.Trends Amplif. 2008 Dec;12(4):316-31. doi: 10.1177/1084713808325881. Epub 2008 Oct 30. Trends Amplif. 2008. PMID: 18974203 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Evaluation of focused multipolar stimulation for cochlear implants: a preclinical safety study.J Neural Eng. 2017 Aug;14(4):046020. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aa7586. J Neural Eng. 2017. PMID: 28607224 Free PMC article.
-
Tonotopic and Default Frequency Fitting for Music Perception in Cochlear Implant Recipients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Nov 1;150(11):960-968. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2024.2895. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024. PMID: 39264640 Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of Frequency Response Manipulations on Musical Sound Quality for Cochlear Implant Users.Trends Hear. 2022 Jan-Dec;26:23312165221120017. doi: 10.1177/23312165221120017. Trends Hear. 2022. PMID: 35983700 Free PMC article.
-
Musical pitch and lexical tone perception with cochlear implants.Int J Audiol. 2011 Apr;50(4):270-8. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2010.542490. Epub 2010 Dec 29. Int J Audiol. 2011. PMID: 21190394 Free PMC article.
-
Learning Pitch with STDP: A Computational Model of Place and Temporal Pitch Perception Using Spiking Neural Networks.PLoS Comput Biol. 2016 Apr 6;12(4):e1004860. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004860. eCollection 2016 Apr. PLoS Comput Biol. 2016. PMID: 27049657 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical