ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2015
Effect of multi-electrode configuration on sensitivity to interaural timing differences in bilateral cochlear-implant users.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurophysiological sensitivity to envelope and pulse timing interaural time differences in cochlear implanted rats with different hearing experiences.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Magnified interaural level differences enhance binaural unmasking in bilateral cochlear implant users.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Rate dependent neural responses of interaural-time-difference cues in fine-structure and envelope.PeerJ · 2024Article
- Interaural time difference sensitivity under binaural cochlear implant stimulation persists at high pulse rates up to 900 pps.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Lateralization of interaural time differences with mixed rates of stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
- Evaluating the Impact of Age, Acoustic Exposure, and Electrical Stimulation on Binaural Sensitivity in Adult Bilateral Cochlear Implant Patients.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Effect of channel separation and interaural mismatch on fusion and lateralization in normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Article
- Speech Understanding in Noise for Adults With Cochlear Implants: Effects of Hearing Configuration, Source Location Certainty, and Head Movement.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2018Article
- Mixed stimulation rates to improve sensitivity of interaural timing differences in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018Article
- Binaural sensitivity in children who use bilateral cochlear implants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017Article
- Lateralization of interaural timing differences with multi-electrode stimulation in bilateral cochlear-implant users.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016Article
- Spatial attention in bilateral cochlear-implant users.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
- The Relationship Between Intensity Coding and Binaural Sensitivity in Adults With Cochlear Implants.Ear and hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent psychophysical studies in bilateral cochlear implant users have shown that interaural timing difference (ITD) sensitivity with electrical stimulation varies depending on the place of stimulation along the cochlear array. While these studies have measured ITD sensitivity at single electrode places separately, it is important to understand how ITD sensitivity is affected when multiple electrodes are stimulated together because multi-electrode stimulation is required for representation of complex sounds. Multi-electrode stimulation may lead to poorer overall performance due to interference from places with poor ITD sensitivity, or from channel interaction due to electrical current spread. Alternatively, multi-electrode stimulation might result in overall good sensitivity if listeners can extract the most reliable ITD cues available. ITD just noticeable differences (JNDs) were measured for different multi-electrode configurations. Results showed that multi-electrode ITD JNDs were poorer than ITD JNDs for the best single-electrode pair. However, presenting ITD information along the whole array appeared to produce better sensitivity compared with restricting stimulation to the ends of the array, where ITD JNDs were comparable to the poorest single-electrode pair. These findings suggest that presenting ITDs in one cochlear region only may not be optimal for maximizing ITD sensitivity in multi-electrode stimulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.