References
- Shepherd RK, Hatsushika S, Clark GM. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitiation. Hear Res 1993; 66: 108–20
- Frijns JHM, de Snoo SL, ten Kate JH. Spatial selectivity in a rotationally symmetric model of the electrically stimulated cochlea. Hear Res 1996; 95: 33–48
- McKay CM, O'Brien A, James CJ. Effect of current level on electrode discrimination in electrical stimulation. Hear Res 1999; 136: 159–64
- Pfingst BE, Holloway LA, Zwolan TA, Collins LM. Effects of stimulus level on electrode-place pitch discrimination in human subjects with cochlear implants. Hear Res 1999; 134: 105–15
- Nelson DA, Van Tasell DJ, Schroeder AC, Soli S, Levine S. Electrode ranking of “place pitch” and speech recognition in electrical hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 98: 1987–99
- Throckmorton CS, Collins LM. Investigation of the effects of temporal and spatial interactions on speech-recognition skills in cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 105: 861–73
- Busby PA, Clark GM. Electrode discrimination by early-deafened subjects using the Cochlear Limited multiple-electrode cochlear implant. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 291–304
- Henry BA, McKay CM, McDermott HJ, Clark GM. The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 108: 1269–80
- Cohen LT, Richardson LM, Saunders E, Cowan RSC. Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Hear Res 2003; 179: 72–87
- Van Weert S, Stokroos RJ, Rikers MMJG, Van Dijk P. Effect of peri-modiolar cochlear implant positioning on auditory nerve responses: a neural response telemetry study. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 2005; 125: 725–31
- Hughes ML, Abbas PJ. The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. J Acoust Soc Am 2006; 119: 1527–37
- Hughes ML, Abbas PJ. Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode arrays. J Acoust Soc Am 2006; 119: 1538–47
- Cohen LT, Saunders E, Clark GM. Psychophysics of a prototype peri-modiolar cochlear implant electrode array. Hear Res 2001; 155: 63–81
- Bacciu A, Pasanisi E, Vincenti V, Guida M, Barbot A, Berghenti M, et al. Comparison of speech perception performance between the Nucleus 24 and Nucleus 24 Contour cochlear implant systems. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 2004; 124: 1155–8
- Cohen LT, Lenarz T, Battmer RD, Bender von Saebelkampth C, Busby PA, Cowan RSC. A psychophysical forward masking comparison of longitudinal spread of neural excitation in the Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 559–6
- Klatt DH, Klatt LC. Analysis, synthesis and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 1990; 87: 820–56
- Taylor MM, Creelman CD. PEST: efficient estimates on probability functions. J Acoust Soc Am 1967;782–7.
- Cohen LT, Xu J, Xu SA, Clark GM. Improved and simplified methods for specifying the position of the electrode bands of a cochlear implant array. Am J Otol 1996; 17: 859–65
- Xu J, Xu SA, Cohen LT, Clark GM. Cochlear view: post-operative radiography for cochlear implantation. Am J Otol 2000; 21: 49–56
- Fishman KE, Shannon RV, Slattery WH. Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1997; 40: 1201–15
- Tyler RS, Parkinson AJ, Woodworth GG, Lowder MW, Gantz BJ. Performance over time of adult patients using the Ineraid or Nucleus cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 102: 508–22