Skip to main content

News about Scitation

In December 2016 Scitation will launch with a new design, enhanced navigation and a much improved user experience.

To ensure a smooth transition, from today, we are temporarily stopping new account registration and single article purchases. If you already have an account you can continue to use the site as normal.

For help or more information please visit our FAQs.

banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
1. Arnoldner, C. , Riss, D. , Baumgartner, W. D. , Kaider, A. , and Hamzavi, J. S. (2007). “Cochlear implant channel separation and its influence on speech perception–implications for a new electrode design,” Audiol. Neuro-Otol. 12, 313324.
2. Baumann, U. , and Nobbe, A. (2004). “Pitch ranking with deeply inserted electrode arrays,” Ear Hear. 25, 275283.
3. Baumann, U. , and Nobbe, A. (2006). “The cochlear implant electrode-pitch function,” Hear. Res. 213, 3442.
4. Boyd, P. J. (2011). “Potential benefits from deeply inserted cochlear implant electrodes,” Ear Hear. 32, 411427.
5. Dorman, M. F. , Spahr, T. , Gifford, R. , Loiselle, L. , McKarns, S. , Holden, T. , Skinner, M. , and Finley, C. (2007). “An electric frequency-to-place map for a cochlear implant patient with hearing in the nonimplanted ear,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 8, 234240.
6. Gani, M. , Valentini, G. , Sigrist, A. , Kos, M. I. , and Boex, C. (2007). “Implications of deep electrode insertion on cochlear implant fitting,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 8, 6983.
7. Greenwood, D. D. (1990). “A cochlear frequency-position function for several species—29 years later,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 25922605.
8. Hamzavi, J. , and Arnoldner, C. (2006). “Effect of deep insertion of the cochlear implant electrode array on pitch estimation and speech perception,” Acta Oto-Laryngol. 126, 11821187.
9. Kawano, A. , Seldon, H. L. , and Clark, G. M. (1996). “Computer-aided three-dimensional reconstruction in human cochlear maps: Measurement of the lengths of organ of Corti, outer wall, inner wall, and Rosenthal's canal,” Ann. Otol., Rhinol., Laryngol. 105, 701709.
10. Kendall, D. (1971). “Seriation from abundance matrices,” in Mathematics in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences, edited by F. Hodson, D. Kendall, and P. Tautu (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh), pp. 215252.
11. Lawless, H. T. (1986). “Multidimensional scaling,” in Clinical Measurement of Taste and Smell, edited by H. L. Meiselman and R. S. Rivlin (MacMillan Publishing Company, New York), pp. 87103.
12. Luo, X. , Padilla, M. , and Landsberger, D. M. (2012). “Pitch contour identification with combined place and temporal cues using cochlear implants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 13251336.
13. Nadol, J. B. , Jr. (1997). “Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: Implications for cochlear implantation,” Otolaryngol.—Head Neck Surg. 117, 220228.
14. Otte, J. , Schunknecht, H. F. , and Kerr, A. G. (1978). “Ganglion cell populations in normal and pathological human cochleae. Implications for cochlear implantation,” Laryngoscope 88, 12311246.
15. Rom, D. M. (1990). “A sequentially rejective test procedure based on a modified Bonferroni inequality,” Biometrika 77, 663665.
16. Spoendlin, H. , and Schrott, A. (1988). “The spiral ganglion and the innervation of the human organ of Corti,” Acta Oto-Laryngol. 105, 403410.
17. Tong, Y. C. , Blamey, P. J. , Dowell, R. C. , and Clark, G. M. (1983). “Psychophysical studies evaluating the feasibility of a speech processing strategy for a multiple-channel cochlear implant,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74, 7380.
18. Young, F. , and Lewyckyj, R. (1979). ALSCAL-4 User's Guide, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Data & Media loading...


Article metrics loading...



Long (31.5 mm) electrode arrays are inserted deeper into the cochlea than the typical 1.25 turn insertion. With these electrode arrays, the apical electrodes are closer to (and possibly extend past) the end of the spiral ganglion. Using multi-dimensional scaling with patients implanted with a 31.5 mm electrode array, the perceptual space between electrodes was measured. The results suggest that deeper insertion increases the range of place pitches, but the perceptual differences between adjacent electrodes become smaller in the apex.


Full text loading...


Access Key

  • FFree Content
  • OAOpen Access Content
  • SSubscribed Content
  • TFree Trial Content
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd