Literature DB >> 7983274

Intensity discrimination in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

A C Schroder1, N F Viemeister, D A Nelson.   

Abstract

Weber fractions (delta I/I) for gated 500-ms tones at 0.3, 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 kHz, and at levels of the standard ranging from absolute threshold to 97 dB SPL, were measured in quiet and in high-pass noise in five listeners with cochlear hearing loss and in three normal-hearing listeners. In regions of hearing loss, the Weber fractions at a given SPL were sometimes normal. When the Weber fractions were normal or near-normal, the addition of high-pass noise elevated the Weber fraction, strongly suggesting the use of spread of excitation to higher frequencies. Inversely, when the Weber fractions were elevated, the addition of high-pass noise produced no additional elevation, suggesting an inability to use spread of excitation. In general, the relative size of the Weber fractions, the effects of high-pass noise, and to a lesser extent, the dependence of the Weber fraction on level, were consistent with expectations based upon the audiometric configuration and the use of excitation spread. There were several notable inconsistencies, however, in which normal Weber fractions were seen at a frequency on the edge of a steep high-frequency loss, and in which elevated Weber fractions were observed in a flat audiometric configuration. Finally, when compared at the same SL, the Weber fraction was sometimes smaller in cochlear-impaired than in normal hearing listeners. This was true even in high-pass noise, where excitation spread was limited, and may reflect the unusually steep rate versus level functions seen in auditory nerve fibers that innervate regions of pathology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7983274     DOI: 10.1121/1.411276

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  12 in total

Review 1.  Neural coding and the basic law of psychophysics.

Authors:  Kenneth O Johnson; Steven S Hsiao; Takashi Yoshioka
Journal:  Neuroscientist       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.519

2.  Level discrimination of speech sounds by hearing-impaired individuals with and without hearing amplification.

Authors:  William M Whitmer; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Auditory-nerve rate responses are inconsistent with common hypotheses for the neural correlates of loudness recruitment.

Authors:  Michael G Heinz; John B Issa; Eric D Young
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-06-10

4.  Perception of suprathreshold amplitude modulation and intensity increments: Weber's law revisited.

Authors:  Magdalena Wojtczak; Neal F Viemeister
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Selective Neuronal Activation by Cochlear Implant Stimulation in Auditory Cortex of Awake Primate.

Authors:  Luke A Johnson; Charles C Della Santina; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Effect of Pulse Rate on Loudness Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Mahan Azadpour; Colette M McKay; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-03-12

7.  Cross-frequency weights in normal and impaired hearing: Stimulus factors, stimulus dimensions, and associations with speech recognition.

Authors:  Elin Roverud; Judy R Dubno; Virginia M Richards; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 2.482

8.  Non-linear laws of echoic memory and auditory change detection in humans.

Authors:  Koji Inui; Tomokazu Urakawa; Koya Yamashiro; Naofumi Otsuru; Makoto Nishihara; Yasuyuki Takeshima; Sumru Keceli; Ryusuke Kakigi
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2010-07-03       Impact factor: 3.288

9.  Response growth with sound level in auditory-nerve fibers after noise-induced hearing loss.

Authors:  Michael G Heinz; Eric D Young
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-10-08       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 10.  A review of decreased sound tolerance in autism: Definitions, phenomenology, and potential mechanisms.

Authors:  Zachary J Williams; Jason L He; Carissa J Cascio; Tiffany G Woynaroski
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 8.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.