Forward masking patterns by low and high-rate stimulation in cochlear implant users: Differences in masking effectiveness and spread of neural excitation

Abstract

The goal of the present study was to compare forward masking patterns by stimulation of low and high rates in cochlear implant users. Postlingually deafened Cochlear Nucleus® device users participated in the study. In experiment 1, two maskers of different rates (250 and 1000 pulses per second) were set at levels that produced equal masking for a probe presented at the same electrode as the maskers. This aligned the two masking functions at the on-site probe location. Then their forward masking patterns for the far probes were compared. Results showed that slope of the masked probe-threshold decay as a function of probe-masker separation was steeper for the high-rate than the low-rate masker. A linear model indicated that this difference in spread of neural excitation (SOE) was accounted for by two factors that were not correlated with each other. One factor was that the low-rate masker required a considerably higher current level to be equally effective in masking as the high-rate masker. The second factor was the effect of stimulation rate on loudness, i.e., integration of multiple pulses. This was consistent with our hypothesis that if an increase in stimulation rate does not result in an increased total neural response, then it is unlikely that the change in rate would change spatial distribution of the neural activity. Interestingly, the difference in masking effectiveness of the maskers predicted subjects’ speech recognition. Poorer performers were those who showed more comparable masking effects by maskers of different rates. The difference in the masking effectiveness may indirectly measure the auditory neurons’ excitability, which predicts speech recognition. In experiment 2, SOE of the high-rate and low-rate maskers were compared at a level that is clinically relevant, i.e., equal loudness. At equal loudness, high-rate stimulation not only produced an overall greater amount of forward masking, but also a shallower decay of masking with probe-masker separation (wider SOE), compared to low rate. The difference in SOE was the opposite to the findings from experiment 1. Whether the maskers were calibrated for equal masking or loudness, the absolute current level was always higher for the low-rate masker, which suggests that the SOE patterns cannot be explained by current spread alone. The fact that high-rate stimulation produced greater masking and wider SOE at equal loudness may explain why using high stimulation rates has not produced consistent benefits for speech recognition, and why lowering stimulation rate from the manufacturer’s default sometimes results in improved speech recognition for subjects.