PURPOSE: The present study evaluated the effects of advancing age and sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) on approximate temporal gap detection thresholds obtained from the Gaps-in-Noise (GIN; Musiek et al., 2005) test. METHOD: Approximate thresholds from the GIN test were compared among 3 groups of participants (older adults with SNHL, older adults with essentially normal hearing, and young adults with normal hearing). Analyses of variance and regression modeling were used to determine the effect of age and audibility on GIN performance. Comparisons of thresholds obtained from the 4 test lists of the GIN were also conducted. RESULTS: Approximate gap thresholds differed significantly across all groups, with the poorest thresholds found in older adults with SNHL and with the best thresholds found in young adults with normal hearing. The strongest predictor of decreases in GIN performance was increased Audibility Index score, but a significant independent effect of age was also documented. Test list influenced GIN performance only in the group of young adults with normal hearing. CONCLUSIONS: The GIN test is a promising clinical measure of temporal resolution. Findings from the present study suggest that age and audibility influence GIN performance and may affect test analysis and interpretation with published normative data.
PURPOSE: The present study evaluated the effects of advancing age and sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) on approximate temporal gap detection thresholds obtained from the Gaps-in-Noise (GIN; Musiek et al., 2005) test. METHOD: Approximate thresholds from the GIN test were compared among 3 groups of participants (older adults with SNHL, older adults with essentially normal hearing, and young adults with normal hearing). Analyses of variance and regression modeling were used to determine the effect of age and audibility on GIN performance. Comparisons of thresholds obtained from the 4 test lists of the GIN were also conducted. RESULTS: Approximate gap thresholds differed significantly across all groups, with the poorest thresholds found in older adults with SNHL and with the best thresholds found in young adults with normal hearing. The strongest predictor of decreases in GIN performance was increased Audibility Index score, but a significant independent effect of age was also documented. Test list influenced GIN performance only in the group of young adults with normal hearing. CONCLUSIONS: The GIN test is a promising clinical measure of temporal resolution. Findings from the present study suggest that age and audibility influence GIN performance and may affect test analysis and interpretation with published normative data.