Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Auditory Perception in Cochlear Implantation

  • Reviews
  • Published:
Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cochlear implantation is a unique development in the field of human sensory system prosthetics. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve induces near-natural auditory sensations. Despite significant progress in the development of cochlear implants (CI), the quality of users’ auditory perception remains significantly limited. The greatest difficulties for CI users arise in difficult communication situations, such as speech perception in noise or with multiple speakers. There are many factors, both technical and physiological, which make speech intelligibility difficult for CI users. Speech perception in CI users is restricted due to poor frequency resolution, pitch distortion, and dynamic range compression. Poor frequency resolution is apparent as decreases in the intelligibility of speech and the ability to perceive music. One important aspect is the state of the central mechanisms of hearing, especially for children with congenital deafness. As a child ages, brain plasticity decreases and the formation of central auditory mechanisms becomes more difficult, so implantation should be carried out at the earliest possible age after hearing loss is detected. Studying the characteristics of auditory perception during electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve not only suggests innovative approaches to improving the hearing abilities of CI users, but also identifies new directions for research into the human auditory system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldoshina, I. A., and Pritts, R., Musical Acoustics, Kompozitor, St. Petersburg (2006).

  • Bissmeyer, S. R., Hossain, S., and Goldsworthy, R. L., “Perceptual learning of pitch provided by cochlear implant stimulation rate,” PLoS One, 15, No. 12, e0242842 (2020), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242842.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boboshko, M. Yu., Berdnikova, I. P., Salakhbekov, M. A., and Mal’tseva, N. V., “Psychoacoustic methods in the diagnosis of central hearing impairment in sensorineural hearing loss,” Ross. Otorinolaringol., No. 2 (87), 9–16 (2017), https://doi.org/10.18692/1810-4800-2017-2-9-16.

  • Caldwell, M. T., Jiam, N. T., and Limb, C. J., “Assessment and improvement of sound quality in cochlear implant users,” Laryngoscope Investig. Otolaryngol., No. 2 110–124 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.71.

  • Canfarotta, M., Dillon, M., Brown, K., et al., “Insertion depth and cochlear implant speech recognition outcomes: a comparative study of 28-and 31.5-mm lateral wall arrays,” Otol. Neurotol., No. 43 (2), 183–189 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000003416.

  • Cesur, S. and Derinsu, U., “Temporal processing and speech perception performance in postlingual adult users of cochlear implants,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., No. 31 129–136 (2020), https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.19002.

  • Chen, F., Chen, J., and Luo, X., “New discoveries in the benefits and outcomes of cochlear implantation,” Neurosci. Sec. Auditory Cogn. Neurosci., 16 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.1062582.

  • Dianzhao, X., Jianfen, L., and Xiuhua, Ch., “Relationship between the ability to detect frequency changes or temporal gaps and speech perception performance in post-lingual cochlear implant users,” Neurosci. Sec. Auditory Cogn. Neurosci., 16 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.904724.

  • Divenyi, P. and Shannon, R., “Auditory time constants unified,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 74, S10 (1983), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2020735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorman, M. F. and Spahr, A. J., “Speech perception by adults with multichannel implants,” in: Cochlear Implants, Waltzman, S. and Roland, J. (eds.), Thieme Medical Publishers, New York (2006), 2nd ed., pp. 193–204.

  • Dorman, M. F. and Wilson, B. S., “The design and function of cochlear implants,” Am. Sci., 92, 436–445 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forli, F., Lazzerini, F., Bruschini, L., et al., “Recent and future developments in cochlear implant technology: review of the literature,” Otorhinolaryngol., 71, No. 3, 196–207 (2021), https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6302.21.02379-3.

  • Freyman, R. L. and Nelson, D. A., “Frequency discrimination as a function of signal frequency and level in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res., 34, No. 6, 1371–1386 (1991).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, S. A., Hearing: An Introduction to Psychological and Physiological Acoustics, Informa Healthcare, London (2009), 5th ed.

  • Glennon, E., Svirsky, M. A., and Froemke, R. C., “Auditory cortical plasticity in cochlear implant users,” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 60, 108–114 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsworthy, R., “Correlations between pitch and phoneme perception in cochlear implant users and their normal hearing peers,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 16, No. 6, 797–809 (2015), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-015-0541-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, R., Nimmons, G. L., Drennan, W., et al., “Development and validation of the university of Washington clinical assessment of music perception test,” Ear Hear., 30, 411–418 (2009), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181a61bc0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ketten, D. R., Skinner, M. W., Wang, G., et al., “In vivo measures of cochlear length and insertion depth of nucleus cochlear implant electrode arrays,” Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol., 175, Supplement, 1–16 (1998).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. Y., Jeon, S. K., Oh, S. H., et al., “Electrical dynamic range is only weakly associated with auditory performance and speech recognition in long-term users of cochlear implants,” Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol., 111, 170–173 (2018), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.06.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koroleva, I. V., Cochlear Implantation and Hearing-Speech Rehabilitation of Deaf Children and Adults, KARO, St. Petersburg (2009), ISBN: 978-5-9925-0348-7.

  • Koroleva, I. V., Introduction to Cochlear Implantation, KARO, St. Petersburg (2023), ISBN: 978-5-9925-1644-9.

  • Limb, C. J. and Alexis Roya, A. T., “Technological, biological, and acoustical constraints to music perception in cochlear implant users,” Hear. Res., 308, 13–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2013.04.009.

  • Loizou, P., Dorman, M., and Fitzke, J., “The effect of reduced dynamic range on speech understanding: implications for patients with cochlear implants,” Ear Hear., 21, No. 1, 25–31 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, T., Nicole, T., and Charles, J., “Assessment and improvement of sound quality in cochlear implant users,” Laryngoscope Investig. Otolaryngol., 2, 119–124 (2017), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikakhlagh, S., Saki, N., Karimi, M., et al., “Evaluation of loudness perception performance in cochlear implant users,” Biomed. Pharmacol. J., 8, (2015), http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=2280>.

  • Plomp, R. and Bouman, M., “Relation between hearing threshold and duration for tone pulses,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 31, 749–758 (1959), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1907781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pralus, A., Hermann, R., Cholvy, F., et al., “Rapid assessment of non-verbal auditory perception in normal-hearing participants and cochlear implant users,” J. Clin. Med., 10, No. 10, 90–93 (2021), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10102093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pudov, V. I. and Stefanovich, M. A., “Perception of music in cochlear implant users,” Ross. Otorinolaringol., No. 2 (45), 114–119 (2010).

  • Rawool, V. W., “A temporal processing primer,” Hear. Rev., 13, No. 5, 30–34 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, L. A., Turner, C. W., Erenberg, S. R., and Gantz, B. J., “Changes in pitch with a cochlear implant over time,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 8, No. 2, 241–257 (2007), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-007-0077-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, A. and Dorman, M., “Central auditory development in children with cochlear implants: clinical implications,” Adv. Otorhinolaryngol., 64, 66–88 (2006), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1159/000094646.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. D., Cushing, S. L., Papsin, B. C., and Gordon, K. A., “Hearing and speech benefits of cochlear implantation in children: A review of the literature,” J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol., 133, 109984 (2020), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jporl.2020.109984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stakhovskaya, O., Sridhar, D., Bonham, B. H., and Leake, P. A., “Frequency map for the human cochlear spiral ganglion: implications for cochlear implants,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 8, 22–33 (2007), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-007-0076-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanovich, M. A. and Pudov, V. I., Features of Auditory Sensations During Electrode Prosthetization (2013), ISBN: 978-3-659-40813-7.

  • Tavartkiladze, G. A., “Current state and prospects for the development of cochlear implantation,” Vestn. Otorinolaringol., No. 80 (3), 4–9 (2015), https://doi.org/10.17116/otorino20158034-9.

  • Turgeon, C., Champoux, F., Lepore, F., and Ellemberg, D., “Deficits in auditory frequency discrimination and speech recognition in cochlear implant users,” Cochlear Implants Int., 16, No. 2, 88–94 (2015), PMID: 25117940, https://doi.org/10.1179/1754762814Y.0000000091.

  • Wagner, L., Altindal, R., and Plontke, S. K., et al., “Pure tone discrimination with cochlear implants and filter-band spread,” Sci. Rep., 11, 20236 (2021), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-99799-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. and Dorman, M., “Cochlear implants: A remarkable past and a brilliant future,” Hear. Res., 242, 3–21 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. S., Finley, C. C., Lawson, D. T., et al., “Better speech recognition with cochlear implants,” Nature, 352, 236–238 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winn, M., Won, J., and Moon, I., “Assessment of spectral and temporal resolution in cochlear implant users using psychoacoustic discrimination and speech cue categorization,” Ear Hear., 37, No. 6, 377–390 (2016), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A., Davis, A., Bredberg, G., et al., “Hair cell distributions in the normal human cochlea,” Acta Otolaryngol., Suppl. 444, 1–48 (1987).

  • Zeng, F., Tang, Q., and Lu, T., “Abnormal pitch perception produced by cochlear implant stimulation,” PLoS One, 9, No. 2, e88662 (2014), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088662.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, F., Underwood, G., Mc Guire, K., et al., “Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users,” Hear. Res., 379, 12–20 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St. Petersburg Research Institute for the Ear, Throat, Nose, and Speech, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg, Russia

    V. I. Pudov & O. V. Zontova

Authors
  1. V. I. Pudov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O. V. Zontova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. I. Pudov.

Additional information

Translated from Sensornye Sistemy, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 320–329, October–December, 2023

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pudov, V.I., Zontova, O.V. Auditory Perception in Cochlear Implantation. Neurosci Behav Physi (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-024-01618-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-024-01618-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation