ArticleEar and hearing
Binaural Pitch Fusion: Binaural Pitch Averaging in Cochlear Implant Users With Broad Binaural Fusion.
Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Binaural pitch fusion in cochlear implant users is broader and narrower with coherent and incoherent envelope modulation, respectively.JASA express letters · 2026Article
- Effects of F1-F2 Frequency Spacing on Spectral Integration in Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Differences in consonant confusion patterns between bimodal cochlear implant users with greater and less bimodal advantage.Frontiers in psychology · 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
- Frequency Fitting Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithm in Cochlear Implant Users with Bimodal Binaural Hearing.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Factors underlying masking release by voice-gender differences and spatial separation cues in multi-talker listening environments in listeners with and without hearing loss.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Effects of the intensified frequency and time ranges on consonant enhancement in bilateral cochlear implant and hearing aid users.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Participation of Acoustic and Electric Hearing in Perceiving Musical Sounds.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIndividuals who use hearing aids (HAs) or cochlear implants (CIs) can experience broad binaural pitch fusion, such that sounds differing in pitch by as much as 3 to 4 octaves are perceptually integrated across ears. Previously, it was shown in HA users that the fused pitch is a weighted average of the two monaural pitches, ranging from equal weighting to dominance by the lower pitch. The goal of this study was to systematically measure the fused pitches in adult CI users, and determine whether CI users experience similar pitch averaging effects as observed in HA users.
designTwelve adult CI users (Cochlear Ltd, Sydney, Australia) participated in this study: six bimodal CI users, who wear a CI with a contralateral HA, and six bilateral CI users. Stimuli to HA ears were acoustic pure tones, and stimuli to CI ears were biphasic pulse trains delivered to individual electrodes. Fusion ranges, the ranges of frequencies/electrodes in the comparison ear that were fused with a single electrode (electrode 22, 18, 12, or 6) in the reference ear, were measured using simultaneous, dichotic presentation of reference and comparison stimuli in opposite ears, and varying the comparison stimulus. Once the fusion ranges were measured, the fused binaural pitch of a reference-pair stimulus combination was measured by finding a pitch match to monaural comparison stimuli presented to the paired stimulus ear.
resultsFusion pitch weighting in CI users varied depending on the pitch difference of the reference-pair stimulus combination, with equal pitch averaging occurring for stimuli closer in pitch and lower pitch dominance occurring for stimuli farther apart in pitch. The averaging region was typically 0.5 to 2.3 octaves around the reference for bimodal CI users and 0.4 to 1.5 octaves for bilateral CI users. In some cases, a bias in the averaging region was observed toward the ear with greater stimulus variability.
conclusionsFusion pitch weighting effects in CI users were similar to those observed previously in HA users. However, CI users showed greater inter-subject variability in both pitch averaging ranges and bias effects. These findings suggest that binaural pitch averaging could be a common underlying mechanism in hearing-impaired listeners.
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.