ArticleEar and hearing
Place-Pitch Interval Perception With a Cochlear Implant.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Behavioral and Subjective Music Perception and Appreciation in Adults with Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants, and Typical Hearing.Audiology research · 2026Article
- User-Centered Design of Neuroprosthetics: Advancements and Limitations.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Computer-based musical interval training program for Cochlear implant users and listeners with no known hearing loss.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Melodic interval perception with acoustic and electric hearing in bimodal and single-sided deaf cochlear implant listeners.Hearing research · 2021Article
- Musical Interval Perception With a Cochlear Implant Alone and With a Contralateral Normal Hearing Ear.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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPitch is poorly perceived by cochlear implant (CI) users. However, as it is not well understood how pitch is encoded with electric stimulation, improving pitch representation with a CI is challenging. Changes in place of stimulation along the cochlea have been described as changes in pitch and can be accurately ranked by CI users. However, it remains unknown if place-pitch can be used to encode musical intervals, which are a necessary attribute of pitch. The objective of these experiments is to determine if place-pitch coding can be used to represent musical intervals with a CI.
designIn the first experiment, 10 CI users and 10 normal hearing (NH) controls were tested on their sensitivity to changes in the semitone spacing between each of the notes in the melody "Happy Birthday." The changes were implemented by uniformly expanding or compressing the frequency differences between each note in the melody. The participant's task was to scale how "out-of-tune" the melody was for various semitone spacing distortions. The notes were represented by pure-tones ≥440 Hz to minimize potential useful temporal information from the stimuli. A second experiment replicated the first experiment using single-sided deafened CI users allowing for a within-subject control. A third experiment verified that the CI users who participated in Experiment 1 were each able to determine pitch direction reliably.
resultsUnlike NH listeners, CI listeners often ranked all distortions of interval spacing similarly in both the first and second experiment, and no effect of interval spacing was detected across CI users. Some participants found distorted interval spacings to be less out-of-tune than the nominally correct interval spacings. However, these patterns were inconsistent across listeners. Although performance was better for the NH listeners, the third experiment demonstrated that the CI listeners were able to reliably identify changes in pitch direction from place-pitch coding.
conclusionsThe data suggest that place-pitch intervals are not properly represented through a CI sound processor. Some limited support is found for place-pitch being useful for interval encoding as some participants demonstrated improved ratings for certain interval distortions. Presumably the interval representation for these participants could be improved by a change to the frequencies represented by each electrode. However, as these patterns vary across listeners, there is not a universal correction to frequency representation that will solve this issue. As results are similar for single-sided deafened CI users, the limitations in ratings are likely not limited by an eroded representation of the melody caused by an extended duration of deafness.
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.