ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2019
Interaural Pitch-Discrimination Range Effects for Bilateral and Single-Sided-Deafness Cochlear-Implant Users.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using musical pitch interval comparisons to assess cochlear implant frequency-to-place maps.Frontiers in audiology and otology · 2025Article
- Sequential auditory grouping reduces binaural pitch fusion in listeners with normal hearing, hearing aids, and cochlear implantsa).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Article
- Lateralization of interaural time differences with mixed rates of stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
- Evaluation of phoneme recognition skills in pediatric auditory brainstem implant users.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022Article
- Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Cochlear Implant Research and Development in the Twenty-first Century: A Critical Update.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2021Review
- Bilateral cochlear implantation: an assessment of language sub-skills and phoneme recognition in school-aged children.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021Article
- Evaluating the Impact of Age, Acoustic Exposure, and Electrical Stimulation on Binaural Sensitivity in Adult Bilateral Cochlear Implant Patients.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Counting or discriminating the number of voices to assess binaural fusion with single-sided vocoders.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- Effects of rate and age in processing interaural time and level differences in normal-hearing and bilateral cochlear-implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Article
- 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
- Pleasantness Ratings for Harmonic Intervals With Acoustic and Electric Hearing in Unilaterally Deaf Cochlear Implant Patients.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- Pitch Matching in Cochlear Implant Users With Single-Sided Deafness: Effects of Electrode Position and Acoustic Stimulus Type.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- Article
- Improving Outcomes of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users by Reducing Interaural Frequency and Loudness Mismatches through Device Programming.Trends in hearingArticle
- A Comparison of Place-Pitch-Based Interaural Electrode Matching Methods for Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Binaural Pitch Fusion: Binaural Pitch Averaging in Cochlear Implant Users With Broad Binaural Fusion.Ear and hearingArticle
- Impact of Presentation Order on Pitch Ranking Sensitivity in Cochlear Implant Users and Normal-Hearing Listeners and Its Mitigation.Trends in 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
By allowing bilateral access to sound, bilateral cochlear implants (BI-CIs) or unilateral CIs for individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD; i.e., normal or near-normal hearing in one ear) can improve sound localization and speech understanding in noise. Spatial hearing in the horizontal plane is primarily conveyed by interaural time and level differences computed from neurons in the superior olivary complex that receive frequency-matched inputs. Because BI-CIs and SSD-CIs do not necessarily convey frequency-matched information, it is critical to understand how to align the inputs to CI users. Previous studies show that interaural pitch discrimination for SSD-CI listeners is highly susceptible to contextual biases, questioning its utility for establishing interaural frequency alignment. Here, we replicate this finding for SSD-CI listeners and show that these biases also extend to BI-CI listeners. To assess the testing-range bias, three ranges of comparison electrodes (BI-CI) or pure-tone frequencies (SSD-CI) were tested: full range, apical/lower half, or basal/upper half. To assess the reference bias, the reference electrode was either held fixed throughout a testing block or randomly chosen from three electrodes (basal end, middle, or apical end of the array). Results showed no effect of reference electrode randomization, but a large testing range bias; changing the center of the testing-range shifted the pitch match by an average 63 % (BI-CI) or 43 % (SSD-CI) of the change magnitude. This bias diminished pitch-match accuracy, with a change in reference electrode shifting the pitch match only an average 34 % (BI-CI) or 40 % (SSD-CI) of the expected amount. Because these effects extended to the relatively more symmetric BI-CI listeners, the results suggest that the bias cannot be attributed to interaural asymmetry. Unless the range effect can be minimized or accounted for, a pitch-discrimination task will produce interaural place-of-stimulation estimates that are highly influenced by the conditions tested, rather than reflecting a true interaural place-pitch comparison.
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.