Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31088265›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

Sound Localization in Real-Time Vocoded Cochlear-Implant Simulations With Normal-Hearing Listeners.

Sebastian A Ausili, Bradford Backus, Martijn J H Agterberg, A John van Opstal, Marc M van Wanrooij

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sebastian A Ausili1 Department of Biophysics, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5138-0988
Bradford Backus2 Oticon Medical, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Martijn J H Agterberg1 Department of Biophysics, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
A John van Opstal1 Department of Biophysics, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Marc M van Wanrooij1 Department of Biophysics, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4180-1835

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bilateral cochlear-implant (CI) users and single-sided deaf listeners with a CI are less effective at localizing sounds than normal-hearing (NH) listeners. This performance gap is due to the degradation of binaural and monaural sound localization cues, caused by a combination of device-related and patient-related issues. In this study, we targeted the device-related issues by measuring sound localization performance of 11 NH listeners, listening to free-field stimuli processed by a real-time CI vocoder. The use of a real-time vocoder is a new approach, which enables testing in a free-field environment. For the NH listening condition, all listeners accurately and precisely localized sounds according to a linear stimulus-response relationship with an optimal gain and a minimal bias both in the azimuth and in the elevation directions. In contrast, when listening with bilateral real-time vocoders, listeners tended to orient either to the left or to the right in azimuth and were unable to determine sound source elevation. When listening with an NH ear and a unilateral vocoder, localization was impoverished on the vocoder side but improved toward the NH side. Localization performance was also reflected by systematic variations in reaction times across listening conditions. We conclude that perturbation of interaural temporal cues, reduction of interaural level cues, and removal of spectral pinna cues by the vocoder impairs sound localization. Listeners seem to ignore cues that were made unreliable by the vocoder, leading to acute reweighting of available localization cues. We discuss how current CI processors prevent CI users from localizing sounds in everyday environments.

Indexed as

Auditory PerceptionCochlear ImplantsSound LocalizationAcoustic StimulationAdultHumansMaleacoustic stimulationauditory perceptioncochlear implantpsychoacoustics

Identifiers

PMID31088265
PMCPMC6535744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.