A better understanding of melodic pitch perception in cochlear implants (CIs) may guide signal processing and/or rehabilitation techniques to improve music perception and appreciation in CI patients. In this study, the mismatch negativity (MMN) in response to infrequent changes in 5-tone pitch contours was obtained in CI users and normal-hearing (NH) listeners. Melodic contour identification (MCI) was also measured. Results showed that MCI performance was poorer in CI than in NH subjects; the MMNs were missing in all CI subjects for the 1-semitone contours. The MMNs with the 5-semitone contours were observed in a smaller proportion of CI than NH subjects. Results suggest that encoding of pitch contour changes in CI users appears to be degraded, most likely due to the limited pitch cues provided by the CI and deafness-related compromise of brain substrates.

Keywords:
Cochlear implant, Music perception, Pitch contour, Mismatch negativity, Electrophysiology
1.
Amenedo E, Escera C: The accuracy of sound duration representation in the human brain determines the accuracy of behavioural perception. Eur J Neurosci 2000;12:2570-2574.
2.
Bakhos D, Roux S, Robier A, Bonnet-Brilhault F, Lescanne E, Bruneau N: Minimization of cochlear implant artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012;76:1627-1632.
3.
Berti S, Roeber U, Schröger E: Bottom-up influences on working memory: behavioral and electrophysiological distraction varies with distractor strength. Exp Psychol 2004;51:249-257.
4.
Cooper RJ, Todd J, McGill K, Michie PT: Auditory sensory memory and the aging brain: a mismatch negativity study. Neurobiol Aging 2006;27:752-762.
5.
Cowan N, Winkler I, Teder W, Naatanen R: Memory prerequisites of mismatch negativity in the auditory event-related potential (ERP). J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1993;19:909-921.
6.
Dalebout SD, Fox LG: Identification of the mismatch negativity in the responses of individual listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2000;11:12-22.
7.
Dalebout SD, Fox LG: Reliability of the mismatch negativity in the responses of individual listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2001;12:245-253.
8.
Debener S, Hine J, Bleeck S, Eyles J: Source localization of auditory evoked potentials after cochlear implantation. Psychophysiology 2008;45:20-24.
9.
Delorme A, Makeig S: EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods 2004;134:9-21.
10.
Friesen LM, Shannon R. V, Baskent D, Wang X: Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;110:1150-1163.
11.
Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd: Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif 2007;11:193-205.
12.
Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd: Maximizing cochlear implant patients' performance with advanced speech training procedures. Hear Res 2008;242:198-208.
13.
Fu QJ, Galvin J, Wang X, Nogaki G: Effects of auditory training on adult cochlear implant patients: a preliminary report. Cochlear Implants Int 2004;5(suppl 1):84-90.
14.
Fujiki N, Naito Y, Hirano S, Kojima H, Shiomi Y, Nishizawa S, et al: Correlation between rCBF and speech perception in cochlear implant users. Auris Nasus Larynx 1999;26:229-236.
15.
Fujioka T, Trainor LJ, Ross B, Kakigi R, Pantev C: Automatic encoding of polyphonic melodies in musicians and nonmusicians. J Cogn Neurosci 2005;17:1578-1592.
16.
Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Nogaki G: Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear 2007;28:302-319.
17.
Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Oba S: Effect of instrument timbre on melodic contour identification by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;124:EL189- 195.
18.
Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Oba S: Effect of a competing instrument on melodic contour identification by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 2009a;125:EL98-103.
19.
Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Shannon RV: Melodic contour identification and music perception by cochlear implant users. Ann NY Acad Sci 2009b;1169:518-533.
20.
Gfeller K, Christ A, Knutson JF, Witt S, Murray KT, Tyler RS: Musical backgrounds, listening habits, and aesthetic enjoyment of adult cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol 2000;11:390-406.
21.
Gfeller K, Lansing CR: Melodic, rhythmic, and timbral perception of adult cochlear implant users. J Speech Hear Res 1991;34:916-920.
22.
Gfeller K, Oleson J, Knutson JF, Breheny P, Driscoll V, Olszewski C: Multivariate predictors of music perception and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users. J Am Acad Audiol 2008;19:120-134.
23.
Gfeller K, Woodworth G, Robin DA, Witt S, Knutson JF: Perception of rhythmic and sequential pitch patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 1997;18:252-260.
24.
Gfeller K, Witt S, Adamek M, Mehr M, Rogers J, Stordahl J, Ringgenberg S: Effects of training on timbre recognition and appraisal by postlingually deafened cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol 2002a;3:132-145.
25.
Gfeller K, Woodworth G, Robin DA, Witt S, Knutson JF: Perception of rhythmic and sequential pitch patterns by normally hearing adults and adult cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2002b;18:252-260.
26.
Giard MH, Perrin F, Pernier J, Bouchet P: Brain generators implicated in the processing of auditory stimulus deviance: a topographic event-related potential study. Psychophysiology 1990;27:627-640.
27.
Gilley PM, Sharma A, Dorman M, Finley CC, Panch AS, Martin K: Minimization of cochlear implant stimulus artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2006;117:1772-1782.
28.
Giraud AL, Truy E, Frackowiak RS, Gregoire MC, Pujol JF, Collet L: Differential recruitment of the speech processing system in healthy subjects and rehabilitated cochlear implant patients. Brain 2000;123:1391-1402.
29.
Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ: Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1997;40:423-431.
30.
Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ: Profile of auditory temporal processing in older listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1999;42:300-311.
31.
Groenen PA, Beynon AJ, Snik AF, van den Broek P: Speech-evoked cortical potentials and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol 2001;30:31-40.
32.
Hagemann D, Naumann E, Thayer JF: The quest for the EEG reference revisited: a glance from brain asymmetry research. Psychophysiology 2001;38:847-857.
33.
Hoppe U, Rosanowski F, Iro H, Eysholdt U: Loudness perception and late auditory evoked potentials in adult cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol 2001;30:119-125.
34.
Jentschke S, Koelsch S: Musical training modulates the development of syntax processing in children. Neuroimage 2009;47:735-744.
35.
Knutson JF, Hinrichs JV, Tyler RS, Gantz BJ, Schartz HA, Woodworth G: Psychological predictors of audiological outcomes of multichannel cochlear implants: preliminary findings. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1991;100:817-822.
36.
Koelsch S, Wittfoth M, Wolf A, Muller J, Hahne A: Music perception in cochlear implant users: an event-related potential study. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:966-972.
37.
Kong YY, Cruz R, Jones JA, Zeng FG: Music perception with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. Ear Hear 2004;25:173-185.
38.
Kraus N, McGee T, Carrell TD, Sharma A: Neurophysiologic bases of speech discrimination. Ear Hear 1995;16:19-37.
39.
Lang AH, Eerola O, Korpilahti P, Holopainen I, Salo S, Aaltonen O: Practical issues in the clinical application of mismatch negativity. Ear Hear 1995;16:118-130.
40.
Leake PA, Snyder RL, Hradek GT, Rebscher SJ: Consequences of chronic extracochlear electrical stimulation in neonatally deafened cats. Hear Res 1995;82:65-80.
41.
Limb CJ, Molloy AT, Jiradejvong P, Braun AR: Auditory cortical activity during cochlear implant-mediated perception of spoken language, melody, and rhythm. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2010;11:133-143.
42.
Lopez L, Jurgens R, Diekmann V, Becker W, Ried S, Grozinger B, et al: Musicians versus nonmusicians. A neurophysiological approach. Ann NY Acad Sci 2003;999:124-130.
43.
McDermott HJ: Music perception with cochlear implants: a review. Trends Amplif 2004;8:49-82.
44.
Minati L, Rosazza C, D'Incerti L, Pietrocini E, Valentini L, Scaioli V, et al: fMRI/ERP of musical syntax: comparison of melodies and unstructured note sequences. Neuroreport 2008;19:1381-1385.
45.
Näätänen R, Astikainen P, Ruusuvirta T, Huotilainen M: Automatic auditory intelligence: an expression of the sensory-cognitive core of cognitive processes. Brain Res Rev 2010;64:123-136.
46.
Nikjeh DA, Lister JJ, Frisch SA: Preattentive cortical-evoked responses to pure tones, harmonic tones, and speech: influence of music training. Ear Hear 2009;30:432-446.
47.
Pakarinen S, Huotilainen M, Naatanen R: The mismatch negativity (MMN) with no standard stimulus. Clin Neurophysiol 2010;121:1043-1050.
48.
Pakarinen S, Takegata R, Rinne T, Huotilainen M, Nätänen R: Measurement of extensive auditory discrimination profiles using the mismatch negativity (MMN) of the auditory event-related potential (ERP). Clin Neurophysiol 2007;118:177-185.
49.
Parbery-Clark A, Skoe E, Lam C, Kraus N: Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise. Ear Hear 2009;30:653-661.
50.
Parbery-Clark A, Strait DL, Anderson S, Hittner E, Kraus N: Musical experience and the aging auditory system: implications for cognitive abilities and hearing speech in noise. PloS One, 2011;6:e18082.
51.
Petermann M, Kummer P, Burger M, Lohscheller J, Eysholdt U, Dollinger M: Statistical detection and analysis of mismatch negativity derived by a multi-deviant design from normal hearing children. Hear Res 2009;247:128-136.
52.
Pisoni DB: Cognitive factors and cochlear implants: some thoughts on perception, learning, and memory in speech perception. Ear Hear 2000;21:70-78.
53.
Pisoni DB, Cleary M: Measures of working memory span and verbal rehearsal speed in deaf children after cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 2003;24(suppl 1):106S-120S.
54.
Ponton CW, Don M: The mismatch negativity in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 1995;16:131-146.
55.
Ponton CW, Moore JK, Eggermont JJ: Prolonged deafness limits auditory system developmental plasticity: evidence from an evoked potentials study in children with cochlear implants. Scand Audiol Suppl 1999;51:13-22.
56.
Purdy SC, Kelly AS, Thorne PR: Auditory evoked potentials as measures of plasticity in humans. Audiol Neurotol 2001;6:211-215.
57.
Roman S, Canevet G, Marquis P, Triglia JM, Liegeois-Chauvel C: Relationship between auditory perception skills and mismatch negativity recorded in free field in cochlear-implant users. Hear Res 2005;201:10-20.
58.
Rouger J, Lagleyre S, Demonet JF, Fraysse B, Deguine O, Barone P: Evolution of crossmodal reorganization of the voice area in cochlear-implanted deaf patients. Hum Brain Mapp 2012;33:1929-1940.
59.
Sandmann P, Kegel A, Eichele T, Dillier N, Lai W, Bendixen A, et al: Neurophysiological evidence of impaired musical sound perception in cochlear-implant users. Clin Neurophysiol 2010;121:2070-2082.
60.
Schvartz KC, Chatterjee M, Gordon-Salant S: Recognition of spectrally degraded phonemes by younger, middle-aged, and older normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;124:3972-3988.
61.
Shannon RV, Fu QJ, Galvin J 3rd: The number of spectral channels required for speech recognition depends on the difficulty of the listening situation. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2004;552:50-54.
62.
Shibata SB, Budenz CL, Bowling SA, Pfingst BE, Raphael Y: Nerve maintenance and regeneration in the damaged cochlea. Hear Res 2011;281:56-64.
63.
Singh S, Liasis A, Rajput K, Towell A, Luxon L: Event-related potentials in pediatric cochlear implant patients. Ear Hear 2004;25:598-610.
64.
Skinner MW, Ketten DR, Holden LK, Harding GW, Smith PG, Gates GA, et al: CT-derived estimation of cochlear morphology and electrode array position in relation to word recognition in nucleus-22 recipients. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2002;3:332-350.
65.
Smith ZM, Delgutte B, Oxenham AJ: Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature 2002;416:87-90.
66.
Tervaniemi M, Rytkonen M, Schroger E, Ilmoniemi RJ, Naatanen R: Superior formation of cortical memory traces for melodic patterns in musicians. Learn Mem 2001;8:295-300.
67.
Tew S, Fujioka T, He C, Trainor L: Neural representation of transposed melody in infants at 6 months of age. Ann NY Acad Sci 2009;1169:287-290.
68.
Tiitinen H, May P, Reinikainen K, Naatanen R: Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory. Nature 1994;372:90-92.
69.
Titova N, Naatanen R: Preattentive voice discrimination by the human brain as indexed by the mismatch negativity. Neurosci Let 2001;308:63-65.
70.
Tobey EA, Devous MD, Buckley K, Cooper WB, Harris TS, Ringe W, et al: Functional brain imaging as an objective measure of speech perception performance in adult cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol 2004;43(suppl 1):S52-S56.
71.
Trainor LJ, McDonald KL, Alain C: Automatic and controlled processing of melodic contour and interval information measured by electrical brain activity. J Cogn Neurosci 2002;14:430-442.
72.
Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T: The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiologic changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport 1998;9:3557-3560.
73.
Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T, Ponton C, Otis B: Central auditory plasticity: changes in the N1-P2 complex after speech-sound training. Ear Hear 2001;22:79-90.
74.
Valente M, Potts L. G, Valente M: Differences and intersubject variability of loudness discomfort levels measured in sound pressure level and hearing level for TDH-50P and ER-3A earphones. J Am Acad Audiol 1997;8:59-67.
75.
Veekmans K, Ressel L, Mueller J, Vischer M, Brockmeier SJ: Comparison of music perception in bilateral and unilateral cochlear implant users and normal-hearing subjects. Audiol Neurotol 2009;14:315-326.
76.
Vuust P, Brattico E, Glerean E, Seppanen M, Pakarinen S, Tervaniemi M, et al: New fast mismatch negativity paradigm for determining the neural prerequisites for musical ability. Cortex 2011;47:1091-1098.
77.
Wilson B. S, Dorman M. F: Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future. Hear Res 2008;242:3-21.
78.
Zhang F, Anderson J, Samy R, Houston L: The adaptive pattern of the late auditory evoked potential elicited by repeated stimuli in cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol 2010;49:277-285.
79.
Zhang F, Samy RN, Anderson JM, Houston L: Recovery function of the late auditory evoked potential in cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2009;20:397-408.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
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.