Literature DB >> 14716510

Estimates of human cochlear tuning at low levels using forward and simultaneous masking.

Andrew J Oxenham1, Christopher A Shera.   

Abstract

Auditory filter shapes were derived from psychophysical measurements in eight normal-hearing listeners using a variant of the notched-noise method for brief signals in forward and simultaneous masking. Signal frequencies of 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 kHz were tested. The signal level was fixed at 10 dB above absolute threshold in the forward-masking conditions and fixed at either 10 or 35 dB above absolute threshold in the simultaneous-masking conditions. The results show that filter equivalent rectangular bandwidths (ERBs) are substantially narrower in forward masking than has been found in previous studies using simultaneous masking. Furthermore, in contrast to earlier studies, the sharpness of tuning doubles over the range of frequencies tested, giving Q(ERB) values of about 10 and 20 at signal frequencies of 1 and 8 kHz, respectively. It is argued that the new estimates of auditory filter bandwidth provide a more accurate estimate of human cochlear tuning at low levels than earlier estimates using simultaneous masking at higher levels, and that they are therefore more suitable for comparison to cochlear tuning data from other species. The data may also prove helpful in defining the parameters for nonlinear models of human cochlear processing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14716510      PMCID: PMC3202745          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-002-3058-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  42 in total

1.  Inter-relationship between different psychoacoustic measures assumed to be related to the cochlear active mechanism.

Authors:  B C Moore; D A Vickers; C J Plack; A J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Basilar-membrane nonlinearity estimated by pulsation threshold.

Authors:  C J Plack; A J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Frequency selectivity as a function of level and frequency measured with uniformly exciting notched noise.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Quantifying the implications of nonlinear cochlear tuning for auditory-filter estimates.

Authors:  Michael G Heinz; H Steven Colburn; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Binaural processing model based on contralateral inhibition. I. Model structure.

Authors:  J Breebaart; S van de Par; A Kohlrausch
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 6.  Functional architecture of auditory cortex.

Authors:  Heather L Read; Jeffery A Winer; Christoph E Schreiner
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 6.627

7.  Two-tone inhibition in auditory-nerve fibers.

Authors:  M B Sachs; N Y Kiang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1968-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Auditory filter nonlinearity in mild/moderate hearing impairment.

Authors:  Richard J Baker; Stuart Rosen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Stimulus-frequency-emission group delay: a test of coherent reflection filtering and a window on cochlear tuning.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  80 in total

Review 1.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

2.  Isoresponse versus isoinput estimates of cochlear filter tuning.

Authors:  Almudena Eustaquio-Martín; Enrique A Lopez-Poveda
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-11-23

3.  Phase effects on the perceived elevation of complex tones.

Authors:  William M Hartmann; Virginia Best; Johahn Leung; Simon Carlile
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Functional modeling of the human auditory brainstem response to broadband stimulation.

Authors:  Sarah Verhulst; Hari M Bharadwaj; Golbarg Mehraei; Christopher A Shera; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  A phenomenological model of peripheral and central neural responses to amplitude-modulated tones.

Authors:  Paul C Nelson; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Psychophysical estimates of nonlinear cochlear processing in younger and older listeners.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Level dependence of auditory filters in nonsimultaneous masking as a function of frequency.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham; Andrea M Simonson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Use of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission latency and level to investigate cochlear mechanics in human ears.

Authors:  Kim S Schairer; John C Ellison; Denis Fitzpatrick; Douglas H Keefe
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Auditory filter tuning inferred with short sinusoidal and notched-noise maskers.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Relationship Between Behavioral and Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions Delay-Based Tuning Estimates.

Authors:  Uzma Shaheen Wilson; Jenna Browning-Kamins; Sriram Boothalingam; Arturo Moleti; Renata Sisto; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.