In a previous study, it was shown that users of a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid are sensitive to interaural time differences (ITDs). In the current study, we investigated (1) the influence on ITD sensitivity of bilaterally varying the place of excitation in the cochlea and of modulation frequency, and (2) the sensitivity to ITD with a 3-channel stimulus generated using continuous-interleaved-sampling (CIS)-like processing. The stimuli were (1) a high-frequency carrier (acoustic sinusoid and single-electrode electric pulse train), modulated with a half-wave-rectified low-frequency sinusoid (a so-called transposed stimulus), and (2) a 3-channel stimulus, generated by sending an acoustic click train through processing similar to the CIS strategy. Four bimodal listeners were sensitive to ITD for both stimulus types. For the first stimulus type, there was no significant influence on ITD sensitivity of the acoustic carrier frequency. Performance decreased with increasing modulation frequency with a limit of sensitivity at around 150–200 Hz. Sensitivity was similar for the single- and 3-channel stimulus. The results indicate the possibility of ITD perception with adapted clinical processors, which can lead to improved sound source localization and binaural unmasking.

Keywords:
Bimodal stimulation, Cochlear implant, Hearing aid, Interaural time difference
1.
Bernstein LR, Trahiotis C: Lateralization of low-frequency, complex waveforms: the use of envelope-based temporal disparities. J Acoust Soc Am 1985;77:1868–1880.
2.
Bernstein LR, Trahiotis C: Enhancing sensitivity to interaural delays at high frequencies by using ‘transposed stimuli’. J Acoust Soc Am 2002;112:1026–1036.
3.
Bernstein LR, Trahiotis C: How sensitivity to ongoing interaural temporal disparities is affected by manipulations of temporal features of the envelopes of high-frequency stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 2009;125:3234–3242.
4.
Blanks DA, Buss E, Grose JH, Fitzpatrick DC, Hall J: Interaural time discrimination of envelopes carried on high-frequency tones as a function of level and interaural carrier mismatch. Ear Hear 2008;29:674–683.
5.
Blanks DA, Roberts JM, Buss E, Hall J, Fitzpatrick DC: Neural and behavioral sensitivity to interaural time differences using amplitude modulated tones with mismatched carrier frequencies. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2007;8:393–408.
6.
Buell TN, Griffin SJ, Bernstein LR: Listeners’ sensitivity to ‘onset/offset’ and ‘ongoing’ interaural delays in high-frequency, sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;123:279.
7.
Chatterjee M, Oba SI: Across- and within-channel envelope interactions in cochlear implant listeners. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2004;5:360–375.
8.
Ching TY, Hill M, Brew J, Incerti P, Priolo S, Rushbrook E, Forsythe L: The effect of auditory experience on speech perception, localization, and functional performance of children who use a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears. Int J Audiol 2005;44:677–690.
9.
Ching TY, Incerti P, Hill M: Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear 2004;25:9–21.
10.
Ching TY, Psarros C, Hill M, Dillon H, Incerti P: Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear? Ear Hear 2001;22:365–380.
11.
Ching TY, van Wanrooy E, Dillon H: Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: a review. Trends Amplif 2007;11:161–192.
12.
Colburn S, Shinn-Cunningham BG, Kidd GJ, Durlach N: The perceptual consequences of binaural hearing. Int J Audiol 2006;45(suppl 1):34–44.
13.
Dye RHJ: The combination of interaural information across frequencies: lateralization on the basis of interaural delay. J Acoust Soc Am 1990;88:2159–2170.
14.
Ewert SD, Dau T: Characterizing frequency selectivity for envelope fluctuations. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;108:1181–1196.
15.
Ewert SD, Dietz M, Klein-Hennig M, Hohmann V: Advances in Auditory Physiology, Psychophysics and Models: The Role of Envelope Wave Form, Adaptation, and Attacks in Binaural Perception. New York, Springer, 2009.
16.
Feddersen WE, Sandel TT, Teas DC, Jeffress LA: Localization of high-frequency tones. J Acoust Soc Am 1957;29:988–991.
17.
Francart T, Brokx J, Wouters J: Sensitivity to interaural level difference and loudness growth with bilateral bimodal stimulation. Audiol Neurotol 2008a;13:309–319.
18.
Francart T, Brokx J, Wouters J: Sensitivity to interaural time differences with combined cochlear implant and acoustic stimulation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2009;10:131–141.
19.
Francart T, van Wieringen A, Wouters J: APEX 3: a multi-purpose test platform for auditory psychophysical experiments. J Neurosci Methods 2008b;172:283–293.
20.
Grantham DW, Ashmead DH, Ricketts TA, Haynes DS, Labadie RF: Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS processing. Ear Hear 2008;29:33–44.
21.
Griffin SJ, Bernstein LR, Ingham NJ, McAlpine D: Neural sensitivity to interaural envelope delays in the inferior colliculus of the guinea pig. J Neurophysiol 2005;93:3463–3478.
22.
Henning GB: Detectability of interaural delay in high-frequency complex waveforms. J Acoust Soc Am 1974;55:84–90.
23.
Kohlrausch A, Fassel R, Dau T: The influence of carrier level and frequency on modulation and beat-detection thresholds for sinusoidal carriers. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;108:723–734.
24.
Laback B, Pok SM, Baumgartner WD, Deutsch WA, Schmid K: Sensitivity to interaural level and envelope time differences of two bilateral cochlear implant listeners using clinical sound processors. Ear Hear 2004;25:488–500.
25.
Laback B, Zimmerman I, Majdak P: Perception of interaural time differences in electric and acoustic hearing. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, Helsingør, 2009.
26.
Majdak P, Laback B, Baumgartner WD: Effects of interaural time differences in fine structure and envelope on lateral discrimination in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2006;120:2190–2201.
27.
McFadden D, Pasanen EG: Lateralization of high frequencies based on interaural time differences. J Acoust Soc Am 1976;59:634–639.
28.
Moore BC, Glasberg BR: Temporal modulation transfer functions obtained using sinusoidal carriers with normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;110:1067–1073.
29.
Nuetzel JM, Hafter ER: Discrimination of interaural delays in complex waveforms: spectral effects. J Acoust Soc Am 1981;69:1112–1118.
30.
Poon BB, Eddington DK, Noel V, Colburn HS: Sensitivity to interaural time difference with bilateral cochlear implants: development over time and effect of interaural electrode spacing. J Acoust Soc Am 2009;126:806–815.
31.
Richardson LM, Busby PA, Clark GM: Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104:442–452.
32.
Seeber BU, Baumann U, Fastl H: Localization ability with bimodal hearing aids and bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116:1698–1709.
33.
Seeber BU, Fastl H: Localization cues with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;123:1030–1042.
34.
Senn P, Kompis M, Vischer M, Haeusler R: Minimum audible angle, just noticeable interaural differences and speech intelligibility with bilateral cochlear implants using clinical speech processors. Audiol Neurotol 2005;10:342–352.
35.
Shannon RV: Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 1992;91:2156–2164.
36.
Snyder RL, Vollmer M, Moore CM, Rebscher SJ, Leake PA, Beitel RE: Responses of inferior colliculus neurons to amplitude-modulated intracochlear electrical pulses in deaf cats. J Neurophysiol 2000;84:166–183.
37.
Trahiotis C, Bernstein LR: Lateralization of bands of noise and sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones: effects of spectral locus and bandwidth. J Acoust Soc Am 1986;79:1950–1957.
38.
Trahiotis C, Bernstein LR, Stern RM, Buell TN: Sound Source Localization – Interaural Correlation as the Basis of a Working Model of Binaural Processing: An Introduction. New York, Springer, 2005, chapt 7, pp 238–271.
39.
Trahiotis C, Stern RM: Lateralization of bands of noise: effects of bandwidth and differences of interaural time and phase. J Acoust Soc Am 1989;86:1285–1293.
40.
Tyler RS, Dunn CC, Witt SA, Noble WG: Speech perception and localization with adults with bilateral sequential cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2007;28(suppl):86S–90S.
41.
Van de Par S, Kohlrausch A: A new approach to comparing binaural masking level differences at low and high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;101:1671–1680.
42.
Van Hoesel RJ: Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol Neurotol 2004;9:234–246.
43.
Van Hoesel RJ: Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 2007;121:2192–2206.
44.
Van Hoesel RJ, Jones GL, Litovsky RY: Interaural time-delay sensitivity in bilateral cochlear implant users: effects of pulse rate, modulation rate, and place of stimulation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2009;10:557–567.
45.
Van Hoesel RJ, Tyler RS: Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2003;113:1617–1630.
46.
Wichmann FA, Hill NJ: The psychometric function. II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Percept Psychophys 2001;63:1314–1329.
47.
Yost WA: Discriminations of interaural phase differences. J Acoust Soc Am 1974;55:1299–1303.
48.
Yost WA, Wightman FL, Green DM: Lateralization of filtered clicks. J Acoust Soc Am 1971;50:1526–1531.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
2010
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.