Literature DB >> 27059627

Informational Masking in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners Measured in a Nonspeech Pattern Identification Task.

Elin Roverud1, Virginia Best2, Christine R Mason2, Jayaganesh Swaminathan2, Gerald Kidd2.   

Abstract

Individuals with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) often experience more difficulty with listening in multisource environments than do normal-hearing (NH) listeners. While the peripheral effects of sensorineural hearing loss certainly contribute to this difficulty, differences in central processing of auditory information may also contribute. To explore this issue, it is important to account for peripheral differences between NH and these hearing-impaired (HI) listeners so that central effects in multisource listening can be examined. In the present study, NH and HI listeners performed a tonal pattern identification task at two distant center frequencies (CFs), 850 and 3500 Hz. In an attempt to control for differences in the peripheral representations of the stimuli, the patterns were presented at the same sensation level (15 dB SL), and the frequency deviation of the tones comprising the patterns was adjusted to obtain equal quiet pattern identification performance across all listeners at both CFs. Tonal sequences were then presented at both CFs simultaneously (informational masking conditions), and listeners were asked either to selectively attend to a source (CF) or to divide attention between CFs and identify the pattern at a CF designated after each trial. There were large differences between groups in the frequency deviations necessary to perform the pattern identification task. After compensating for these differences, there were small differences between NH and HI listeners in the informational masking conditions. HI listeners showed slightly greater performance asymmetry between the low and high CFs than did NH listeners, possibly due to central differences in frequency weighting between groups.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  informational masking; sensorineural hearing loss

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27059627      PMCID: PMC4871212          DOI: 10.1177/2331216516638516

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Hear        ISSN: 2331-2165            Impact factor:   3.293


  58 in total

1.  Effects of background noise level on behavioral estimates of basilar-membrane compression.

Authors:  Melanie J Gregan; Peggy B Nelson; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Auditory attention strategy depends on target linguistic properties and spatial configuration.

Authors:  Daniel R McCloy; Adrian K C Lee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The influence of spatial separation on divided listening.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Frederick J Gallun; Antje Ihlefeld; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Binaural interference and auditory grouping.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Frederick J Gallun; Simon Carlile; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Unilateral and bilateral hearing aids, spatial release from masking and auditory acclimatization.

Authors:  Piers Dawes; Kevin J Munro; Sridhar Kalluri; Brent Edwards
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Binaural advantage for sound pattern identification.

Authors:  G Kidd; C R Mason; T L Rohtla
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Comparisons of frequency selectivity in simultaneous and forward masking for subjects with unilateral cochlear impairments.

Authors:  B C Moore; B R Glasberg
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 8.  Strategies and models of selective attention.

Authors:  A M Treisman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1969-05       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  The effect of competing melodies on melody recognition by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  J A de Laat; R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1985-11       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  The effects of hearing impairment and aging on spatial processing.

Authors:  Helen Glyde; Sharon Cameron; Harvey Dillon; Louise Hickson; Mark Seeto
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Cortical and Sensory Causes of Individual Differences in Selective Attention Ability Among Listeners With Normal Hearing Thresholds.

Authors:  Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Hearing-Impaired Listeners Show Reduced Attention to High-Frequency Information in the Presence of Low-Frequency Information.

Authors:  Elin Roverud; Judy R Dubno; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.