Temporal-Gap Detection by Cochlear Prosthesis Users Minimum-detectable gaps for sinusoidal stimuli were measured for three users of a multi electrode cochlear prosthesis as functions of stimulus level, frequency, and electrode place within the cochlea. Stimulus level was scaled by sensation level and by growth-of-loudness functions generated for each condition by direct magnitude estimation. Minimum-detectable gaps decreased ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 1989
Temporal-Gap Detection by Cochlear Prosthesis Users
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • John P. Preece
    Departments of Speech Pathology & Audiology and Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, the University of Iowa, Iowa City
  • Richard S. Tyler
    Departments of Speech Pathology & Audiology and Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, the University of Iowa, Iowa City
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 1989
Temporal-Gap Detection by Cochlear Prosthesis Users
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1989, Vol. 32, 849-856. doi:10.1044/jshr.3204.849
History: Received June 20, 1988 , Accepted April 14, 1989
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1989, Vol. 32, 849-856. doi:10.1044/jshr.3204.849
History: Received June 20, 1988; Accepted April 14, 1989

Minimum-detectable gaps for sinusoidal stimuli were measured for three users of a multi electrode cochlear prosthesis as functions of stimulus level, frequency, and electrode place within the cochlea. Stimulus level was scaled by sensation level and by growth-of-loudness functions generated for each condition by direct magnitude estimation. Minimum-detectable gaps decreased with increase in either sensation level or loudness, up to a plateau. When compared at equal sensation levels, the minimum-detectable gaps decreased with frequency increases. The frequency effect on minimum-detectable gaps is reduced if the data are considered at equal loudness. Comparison across place of stimulation within the cochlea showed minimum-detectable gaps to be shorter for more basal electrode placement at low stimulus levels. No differences in minimum-detectable gap as a function of place were found at higher stimulus levels.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access