Literature DB >> 25653371

Individual differences reveal correlates of hidden hearing deficits.

Hari M Bharadwaj1, Salwa Masud2, Golbarg Mehraei3, Sarah Verhulst4, Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham2.   

Abstract

Clinical audiometry has long focused on determining the detection thresholds for pure tones, which depend on intact cochlear mechanics and hair cell function. Yet many listeners with normal hearing thresholds complain of communication difficulties, and the causes for such problems are not well understood. Here, we explore whether normal-hearing listeners exhibit such suprathreshold deficits, affecting the fidelity with which subcortical areas encode the temporal structure of clearly audible sound. Using an array of measures, we evaluated a cohort of young adults with thresholds in the normal range to assess both cochlear mechanical function and temporal coding of suprathreshold sounds. Listeners differed widely in both electrophysiological and behavioral measures of temporal coding fidelity. These measures correlated significantly with each other. Conversely, these differences were unrelated to the modest variation in otoacoustic emissions, cochlear tuning, or the residual differences in hearing threshold present in our cohort. Electroencephalography revealed that listeners with poor subcortical encoding had poor cortical sensitivity to changes in interaural time differences, which are critical for localizing sound sources and analyzing complex scenes. These listeners also performed poorly when asked to direct selective attention to one of two competing speech streams, a task that mimics the challenges of many everyday listening environments. Together with previous animal and computational models, our results suggest that hidden hearing deficits, likely originating at the level of the cochlear nerve, are part of "normal hearing."
Copyright © 2015 the authors 0270-6474/15/352161-12$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  central auditory processing disorders; cochlear neuropathy; envelope-following response; frequency-following response; hidden hearing loss; temporal coding

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25653371      PMCID: PMC4402332          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3915-14.2015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  68 in total

1.  Word recognition in competing babble and the effects of age, temporal processing, and absolute sensitivity.

Authors:  Karen B Snell; Frances M Mapes; Elizabeth D Hickman; D Robert Frisina
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.840

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

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-07-10

3.  Measurement of the distribution of medial olivocochlear acoustic reflex strengths across normal-hearing individuals via otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Bradford C Backus; John J Guinan
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-10-12

4.  Individual differences in auditory abilities.

Authors:  Gary R Kidd; Charles S Watson; Brian Gygi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Auditory grouping.

Authors:  C J Darwin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Hearing complaints of patients with King-Kopetzky syndrome (obscure auditory dysfunction).

Authors:  F Zhao; D Stephens
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  1996-12

8.  Tinnitus with a normal audiogram: physiological evidence for hidden hearing loss and computational model.

Authors:  Roland Schaette; David McAlpine
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Primary neural degeneration in the Guinea pig cochlea after reversible noise-induced threshold shift.

Authors:  Harrison W Lin; Adam C Furman; Sharon G Kujawa; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-06-18

10.  Human posterior auditory cortex gates novel sounds to consciousness.

Authors:  Iiro P Jääskeläinen; Jyrki Ahveninen; Giorgio Bonmassar; Anders M Dale; Risto J Ilmoniemi; Sari Levänen; Fa-Hsuan Lin; Patrick May; Jennifer Melcher; Steven Stufflebeam; Hannu Tiitinen; John W Belliveau
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-04-19       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  107 in total

1.  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

2.  Using individual differences to test the role of temporal and place cues in coding frequency modulation.

Authors:  Kelly L Whiteford; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Cochlear synaptopathy in acquired sensorineural hearing loss: Manifestations and mechanisms.

Authors:  M Charles Liberman; Sharon G Kujawa
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Osmotic stabilization prevents cochlear synaptopathy after blast trauma.

Authors:  Jinkyung Kim; Anping Xia; Nicolas Grillet; Brian E Applegate; John S Oghalai
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Noise-induced cochlear synaptopathy in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Authors:  M D Valero; J A Burton; S N Hauser; T A Hackett; R Ramachandran; M C Liberman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Masking Differentially Affects Envelope-following Responses in Young and Aged Animals.

Authors:  Jesyin Lai; Edward L Bartlett
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 3.590

7.  Auditory brainstem response latency in forward masking, a marker of sensory deficits in listeners with normal hearing thresholds.

Authors:  Golbarg Mehraei; Andreu Paredes Gallardo; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham; Torsten Dau
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  A test of model classes accounting for individual differences in the cocktail-party effect.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Briana Rodriguez; Jungmee Lee; Torben Pastore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 9.  Occupational Hearing Loss from Non-Gaussian Noise.

Authors:  Alice H Suter
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2017-07-19

10.  Synaptopathy in the Aging Cochlea: Characterizing Early-Neural Deficits in Auditory Temporal Envelope Processing.

Authors:  Aravindakshan Parthasarathy; Sharon G Kujawa
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.