Pitch-matching and binaural-cue methods yield uncorrelated electrode pairings in implant patients

Evidence

In contrast to the common assumption that pitch-matched pairs maximize sensitivity to binaural cues, for this subject the pairs with best IPTD sensitivity are 1.6–3.6 electrodes away from (interpolated) electrode identical pitch perception. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1451

The results from the other methods and of the other subjects are not shown because of the space limitations. The general trends were: (1) Pairwise pitch comparison results highly depend on the participant’s clinical frequency-place fitting map. The matched pair indicates a similar frequency range in the map, except for one subject which was implanted only 9 months before the experiment. (2) Both BIC and IPTD based pairing results indicate a large 2–3 electrode mismatch for some subjects. There is clear correlation between the mismatches indicated by these two methods. (3) In line with Poon et al. ( 2009 ) there is no correlation between the pitch matched pairs and the IPTD matched pair and in line with He et al. ( 2012 ) there is no correlation between the pitch matched pairs and the BIC matched pair. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1470

Categorization

• XREF: Counterintuitive place-vs-pitch dissociation resonates with the general principle that perceived pitch and spatial/implant stimulation site diverge, connecting to cochlear tonotopy literature.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1451; Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1470