Influence of Instantaneous Compression on Recognition of Speech in Noise with Temporal Dips.

BACKGROUND: In listening environments with background noise that fluctuates in level, listeners with normal hearing can "glimpse" speech during dips in the noise, resulting in better speech recognition in fluctuating noise than in steady noise at the same overall level (referred to as masking release). Listeners with sensorineural hearing loss show less masking release. Amplification can improve masking release but not to the same extent that it does for listeners with normal hearing. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare masking release for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss obtained with an experimental hearing-aid signal-processing algorithm with instantaneous compression (referred to as a suppression hearing aid, SHA) to masking release obtained with fast compression. The suppression hearing aid mimics effects of normal cochlear suppression, i.e., the reduction in the response to one sound by the simultaneous presentation of another sound. RESEARCH DESIGN: A within-participant design with repeated measures across test conditions was used. STUDY SAMPLE: Participants included 29 adults with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss and 21 adults with normal hearing. INTERVENTION: Participants with sensorineural hearing loss were fitted with simulators for SHA and a generic hearing aid (GHA) with fast (but not instantaneous) compression (5 ms attack and 50 ms release times) and no suppression. Gain was prescribed using either an experimental method based on categorical loudness scaling (CLS) or the Desired Sensation Level (DSL) algorithm version 5a, resulting in a total of four processing conditions: CLS-GHA, CLS-SHA, DSL-GHA, and DSL-SHA. DATA COLLECTION: All participants listened to consonant-vowel-consonant nonwords in the presence of temporally-modulated and steady noise. An adaptive-tracking procedure was used to determine the signal-to-noise ratio required to obtain 29% and 71% correct. Measurements were made with amplification for participants with sensorineural hearing loss and without amplification for participants with normal hearing. ANALYSIS: Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine the influence of within-participant factors of noise type and, for participants with sensorineural hearing loss, processing condition on masking release. Pearson correlational analysis was used to assess the effect of age on masking release for participants with sensorineural hearing loss. RESULTS: Statistically significant masking release was observed for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss for 29% correct, but not for 71% correct. However, the amount of masking release was less than masking release for participants with normal hearing. There were no significant differences among the amplification conditions for participants with sensorineural hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that amplification with either instantaneous or fast compression resulted in similar masking release for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. However, the masking release was less for participants with hearing loss than it was for those with normal hearing.

Influence of suppression on restoration of spectral loudness summation in listeners with hearing loss.

Loudness depends on both the intensity and spectrum of a sound. Listeners with normal hearing perceive a broadband sound as being louder than an equal-level narrowband sound because loudness grows nonlinearly with level and is then summed across frequency bands. This difference in loudness as a function of bandwidth is reduced in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Suppression, the reduction in the cochlear response to one sound by the simultaneous presentation of another sound, is also reduced in listeners with SNHL. Hearing-aid gain that is based on loudness measurements with pure tones may fail to restore normal loudness growth for broadband sounds. This study investigated whether hearing-aid amplification that mimics suppression can improve loudness summation for listeners with SNHL. Estimates of loudness summation were obtained using measurements of categorical loudness scaling (CLS). Stimuli were bandpass-filtered noises centered at 2 kHz with bandwidths in the range of 0.1-6.4 kHz. Gain was selected to restore normal loudness based on CLS measurements with pure tones. Gain that accounts for both compression and suppression resulted in better restoration of loudness summation, compared to compression alone. However, restoration was imperfect, suggesting that additional refinements to the signal processing and gain-prescription algorithms are needed.

Using Thresholds in Noise to Identify Hidden Hearing Loss in Humans.

OBJECTIVES: Recent animal studies suggest that noise-induced synaptopathy may underlie a phenomenon that has been labeled hidden hearing loss (HHL). Noise exposure preferentially damages low spontaneous-rate auditory nerve fibers, which are involved in the processing of moderate- to high-level sounds and are more resistant to masking by background noise. Therefore, the effect of synaptopathy may be more evident in suprathreshold measures of auditory function, especially in the presence of background noise. The purpose of this study was to develop a statistical model for estimating HHL in humans using thresholds in noise as the outcome variable and measures that reflect the integrity of sites along the auditory pathway as explanatory variables. Our working hypothesis is that HHL is evident in the portion of the variance observed in thresholds in noise that is not dependent on thresholds in quiet, because this residual variance retains statistical dependence on other measures of suprathreshold function. DESIGN: Study participants included 13 adults with normal hearing (≤15 dB HL) and 20 adults with normal hearing at 1 kHz and sensorineural hearing loss at 4 kHz (>15 dB HL). Thresholds in noise were measured, and the residual of the correlation between thresholds in noise and thresholds in quiet, which we refer to as thresholds-in-noise residual, was used as the outcome measure for the model. Explanatory measures were as follows: (1) auditory brainstem response (ABR) waves I and V amplitudes; (2) electrocochleographic action potential and summating potential amplitudes; (3) distortion product otoacoustic emissions level; and (4) categorical loudness scaling. All measurements were made at two frequencies (1 and 4 kHz). ABR and electrocochleographic measurements were made at 80 and 100 dB peak equivalent sound pressure level, while wider ranges of levels were tested during distortion product otoacoustic emission and categorical loudness scaling measurements. A model relating the thresholds-in-noise residual and the explanatory measures was created using multiple linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Predictions of thresholds-in-noise residual using the model accounted for 61% (p < 0.01) and 48% (p < 0.01) of the variance in the measured thresholds-in-noise residual at 1 and 4 kHz, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of thresholds in noise, the summating potential to action potential ratio, and ABR waves I and V amplitudes may be useful for the prediction of HHL in humans. With further development, our approach of quantifying HHL by the variance that remains in suprathreshold measures of auditory function after removing the variance due to thresholds in quiet, together with our statistical modeling, may provide a quantifiable and verifiable estimate of HHL in humans with normal hearing and with hearing loss. The current results are consistent with the view that inner hair cell and auditory nerve pathology may underlie suprathreshold auditory performance.

Multi-tone suppression of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in humans.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the combined effect of multiple suppressors. Distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements were made in normal-hearing participants. Primary tones had fixed frequencies (f2 = 4000 Hz; f1 / f2 = 1.22) and a range of levels. Suppressor tones were at three frequencies (fs = 2828, 4100, 4300 Hz) and range of levels. Decrement was defined as the attenuation in DPOAE level due to the presence of a suppressor. A measure of suppression called suppressive intensity was calculated by an equation previously shown to fit DPOAE suppression data. Suppressor pairs, which were the combination of two different frequencies, were presented at levels selected to have equal single-suppressor decrements. A hybrid model that represents a continuum between additive intensity and additive attenuation best described the results. The suppressor pair with the smallest frequency ratio produced decrements that were more consistent with additive intensity. The suppressor pair with the largest frequency ratio produced decrements at the highest level that were consistent with additive attenuation. Other suppressor-pair conditions produced decrements that were intermediate between these two alternative models. The hybrid model provides a useful framework for representing the observed range of interaction when two suppressors are combined.

Tone-burst auditory brainstem response wave V latencies in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears.

The metric used to equate stimulus level [sound pressure level (SPL) or sensation level (SL)] between ears with normal hearing (NH) and ears with hearing loss (HL) in comparisons of auditory function can influence interpretation of results. When stimulus level is equated in dB SL, higher SPLs are presented to ears with HL due to their reduced sensitivity. As a result, it may be difficult to determine if differences between ears with NH and ears with HL are due to cochlear pathology or level-dependent changes in cochlear mechanics. To the extent that level-dependent changes in cochlear mechanics contribute to auditory brainstem response latencies, comparisons between normal and pathologic ears may depend on the stimulus levels at which comparisons are made. To test this hypothesis, wave V latencies were measured in 16 NH ears and 15 ears with mild-to-moderate HL. When stimulus levels were equated in SL, latencies were shorter in HL ears. However, latencies were similar for NH and HL ears when stimulus levels were equated in SPL. These observations demonstrate that the effect of stimulus level on wave V latency is large relative to the effect of HL, at least in cases of mild-to-moderate HL.

Categorical loudness scaling and equal-loudness contours in listeners with normal hearing and hearing loss.

This study describes procedures for constructing equal-loudness contours (ELCs) in units of phons from categorical loudness scaling (CLS) data and characterizes the impact of hearing loss on these estimates of loudness. Additionally, this study developed a metric, level-dependent loudness loss, which uses CLS data to specify the deviation from normal loudness perception at various loudness levels and as function of frequency for an individual listener with hearing loss. CLS measurements were made in 87 participants with hearing loss and 61 participants with normal hearing. An assessment of the reliability of CLS measurements was conducted on a subset of the data. CLS measurements were reliable. There was a systematic increase in the slope of the low-level segment of the CLS functions with increase in the degree of hearing loss. ELCs derived from CLS measurements were similar to standardized ELCs (International Organization for Standardization, ISO 226:2003). The presence of hearing loss decreased the vertical spacing of the ELCs, reflecting loudness recruitment and reduced cochlear compression. Representing CLS data in phons may lead to wider acceptance of CLS measurements. Like the audiogram that specifies hearing loss at threshold, level-dependent loudness loss describes deficit for suprathreshold sounds. Such information may have implications for the fitting of hearing aids.

The impact of degree of hearing loss on auditory brainstem response predictions of behavioral thresholds.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of hearing loss and prescription of amplification for infants and young children require accurate estimates of ear- and frequency-specific behavioral thresholds based on auditory brainstem response (ABR) measurements. Although the overall relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds has been demonstrated, the agreement is imperfect, and the accuracy of predictions of behavioral threshold based on ABR may depend on degree of hearing loss. Behavioral thresholds are lower than ABR thresholds, at least in part due to differences in calibration interacting with the effects of temporal integration, which are manifest in behavioral measurements but not ABR measurements and depend on behavioral threshold. Listeners with sensory hearing loss exhibit reduced or absent temporal integration, which could impact the relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds as degree of hearing loss increases. The present study evaluated the relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds in infants and children over a range of hearing thresholds, and tested an approach for adjusting the correction factor based on degree of hearing loss as estimated by ABR measurements. DESIGN: A retrospective review of clinical records was completed for 309 ears of 177 children with hearing thresholds ranging from normal to profound hearing loss and for whom both ABR and behavioral thresholds were available. Children were required to have the same middle ear status at both evaluations. The relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds was examined. Factors that potentially could affect the relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds were analyzed, including degree of hearing loss observed on the ABR, behavioral test method (visual reinforcement, conditioned play, or conventional audiometry), the length of time between ABR and behavioral assessments, and clinician-reported reliability of the behavioral assessment. Predictive accuracy of a correction factor based on the difference between ABR and behavioral thresholds as a function of ABR threshold was compared to the predictive accuracy achieved by two other correction approaches in current clinical use. RESULTS: As expected, ABR threshold was a significant predictor of behavioral threshold. The agreement between ABR and behavioral thresholds varied as a function of degree of hearing loss. The test method, length of time between assessments, and reported reliability of the behavioral test results were not related to the differences between ABR and behavioral thresholds. A correction factor based on the linear relationship between the differences in ABR and behavioral thresholds as a function of ABR threshold resulted in more accurately predicted behavioral thresholds than other correction factors in clinical use. CONCLUSIONS: ABR is a valid predictor of behavioral threshold in infants and children. A correction factor that accounts for the effect of degree of hearing loss on the differences between ABR and behavioral thresholds resulted in more accurate predictions of behavioral thresholds than methods that used a constant correction factor regardless of degree of hearing loss. These results are consistent with predictions based on previous research on temporal integration for listeners with hearing loss.

Air-leak effects on ear-canal acoustic absorbance.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate ear-canal acoustic measurements, such as wideband acoustic admittance, absorbance, and otoacoustic emissions, require that the measurement probe be tightly sealed in the ear canal. Air leaks can compromise the validity of the measurements, interfere with calibrations, and increase variability. There are no established procedures for determining the presence of air leaks or criteria for what size leak would affect the accuracy of ear-canal acoustic measurements. The purpose of this study was to determine ways to quantify the effects of air leaks and to develop objective criteria to detect their presence. DESIGN: Air leaks were simulated by modifying the foam tips that are used with the measurement probe through insertion of thin plastic tubing. To analyze the effect of air leaks, acoustic measurements were taken with both modified and unmodified foam tips in brass-tube cavities and human ear canals. Measurements were initially made in cavities to determine the range of critical leaks. Subsequently, data were collected in ears of 21 adults with normal hearing and normal middle-ear function. Four acoustic metrics were used for predicting the presence of air leaks and for quantifying these leaks: (1) low-frequency admittance phase (averaged over 0.1-0.2 kHz), (2) low-frequency absorbance, (3) the ratio of compliance volume to physical volume (CV/PV), and (4) the air-leak resonance frequency. The outcome variable in this analysis was the absorbance change (Δabsorbance), which was calculated in eight frequency bands. RESULTS: The trends were similar for both the brass cavities and the ear canals. ΔAbsorbance generally increased with air-leak size and was largest for the lower frequency bands (0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.5 kHz). Air-leak effects were observed in frequencies up to 10 kHz, but their effects above 1 kHz were unpredictable. These high-frequency air leaks were larger in brass cavities than in ear canals. Each of the four predictor variables exhibited consistent dependence on air-leak size. Low-frequency admittance phase and CV/PV decreased, while low-frequency absorbance and the air-leak resonance frequency increased. CONCLUSION: The effect of air leaks can be significant when their equivalent diameter exceeds 0.01 in. The observed effects were greatest at low frequencies where air leaks caused absorbance to increase. Recommended criteria for detecting air leaks include the following: when the frequency range of interest extends as low as 0.1 kHz, low-frequency absorbance should be ≤0.20 and low-frequency admittance phase ≥61 degrees. For frequency ranges as low as 0.2 kHz, low-frequency absorbance should be ≤0.29 and low-frequency admittance phase ≥44 degrees.

Reliability and clinical test performance of cochlear reflectance.

OBJECTIVE: Cochlear reflectance (CR) is the cochlear contribution to ear-canal reflectance. CR is equivalent to an otoacoustic emission (OAE) deconvolved by forward pressure in the ear canal. Similar to other OAE measures, CR level is related to cochlear status. When measured using wideband noise stimuli, potential advantages of CR over other types of OAEs include (1) the capability to cover a wider frequency range more efficiently by requiring fewer measurements, (2) minimal influence on the recorded emission from the measurement system and middle ear, (3) lack of entrainment of spontaneous OAEs, and (4) easier interpretation because of the existence of an equivalent linear model, which validates the application of linear systems theory. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the reliability, assess the accuracy in a clinical screening paradigm, and determine the relation of CR to audiometric thresholds. Thus, this study represents an initial assessment of the clinical utility of CR. DESIGN: Data were collected from 32 normal-hearing and 58 hearing-impaired participants. A wideband noise stimulus presented at seven stimulus levels (10 to 70 dB SPL, 10 dB steps) was used to elicit the CR. Reliability of CR was assessed using Cronbach's α, standard error of measurement, and absolute differences between CR data from three separate test sessions. Test performance was evaluated using clinical decision theory. The ability of CR to predict audiometric thresholds was evaluated using regression analysis. RESULTS: CR repeatability across test sessions was similar to that of other clinical measurements. However, both the accuracy with which CR distinguished normal-hearing from hearing-impaired ears and the accuracy with which CR predicted audiometric thresholds were less than those reported in previous studies using distortion-product OAE measurements. CONCLUSIONS: CR measurements are repeatable between test sessions, can be used to predict auditory status, and are related to audiometric thresholds. However, under current conditions, CR does not perform as well as other OAE measurements. Further developments in CR measurement and analysis methods may improve performance. CR has theoretical advantages for cochlear modeling, which may lead to improved interpretation of cochlear status.

Signal-processing strategy for restoration of cross-channel suppression in hearing-impaired listeners.

Because frequency components interact nonlinearly with each other inside the cochlea, the loudness growth of tones is relatively simple in comparison to the loudness growth of complex sounds. The term suppression refers to a reduction in the response growth of one tone in the presence of a second tone. Suppression is a salient feature of normal cochlear processing and contributes to psychophysical masking. Suppression is evident in many measurements of cochlear function in subjects with normal hearing, including distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs). Suppression is also evident, to a lesser extent, in subjects with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. This paper describes a hearing-aid signal-processing strategy that aims to restore both loudness growth and two-tone suppression in hearing-impaired listeners. The prescription of gain for this strategy is based on measurements of loudness by a method known as categorical loudness scaling. The proposed signal-processing strategy reproduces measured DPOAE suppression tuning curves and generalizes to any number of frequency components. The restoration of both normal suppression and normal loudness has the potential to improve hearing-aid performance and user satisfaction.

Effect of calibration method on distortion-product otoacoustic emission measurements at and around 4 kHz.

OBJECTIVES: Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) collected after sound pressure level (SPL) calibration are susceptible to standing waves that affect measurements at the plane of the probe microphone due to overlap of incident and reflected waves. These standing-wave effects can be as large as 20 dB, and may affect frequencies both above and below 4 kHz. It has been shown that forward pressure level (FPL) calibration minimizes standing-wave effects by isolating the forward-propagating component of the stimulus. Yet, previous work has failed to demonstrate more than a small difference in test performance and behavioral-threshold prediction with DPOAEs after SPL and FPL calibration. One potential limitation in prior studies is that measurements were restricted to octave and interoctave frequencies; as a consequence, data were not necessarily collected at the standing-wave null frequency. In the present study, DPOAE responses were measured with f2 set to each participant's standing-wave frequency in an effort to increase the possibility that differences in test performance and threshold prediction would be observed for SPL and FPL calibration methods. DESIGN: Data were collected from 42 normal-hearing participants and 93 participants with hearing loss. DPOAEs were measured with f2 set to 4 kHz and at each participant's notch frequency after SPL and FPL calibration. DPOAE input/output functions were obtained from -10 to 80 dB in 5 dB steps for each calibration/stimulus condition. Test performance was evaluated using clinical decision theory. Both area under receiver operating characteristic curves for all stimulus levels and cumulative distributions when L2 = 50 dB (a level at which the best performance was observed regardless of calibration method) were used to evaluate the accuracy with which auditory status was determined. A bootstrap procedure was used to evaluate the significance of the differences in test performance between SPL and FPL calibrations. DPOAE predictions of behavioral threshold were evaluated by correlating actual behavioral thresholds and predicted thresholds using a multiple linear regression model. RESULTS: First, larger DPOAE levels were measured after SPL calibration than after FPL calibration, which demonstrated the expected impact of standing waves. Second, for both FPL and SPL calibration, test performance was best for moderate stimulus levels. Third, differences in test performance between calibration methods were evident at low- and high-stimulus levels. Fourth, there were small but statistically significant improvements in test performance after FPL calibration for clinically relevant conditions. Fifth, calibration method had no effect on threshold prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Standing waves after SPL calibration have an impact on DPOAE levels. Although the effect of calibration method on test performance was small, test performance was better after FPL calibration than after SPL calibration. There was no effect of calibration method on predictions of behavioral threshold.

Relation of distortion-product otoacoustic emission input-output functions to loudness.

The aim of this study is to further explore the relationship between distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements and categorical loudness scaling (CLS) measurements using multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis. Recently, Thorson et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1282-1295 (2012)] obtained predictions of CLS loudness ratings from DPOAE input/output (I/O) functions using MLR analysis. The present study extends that work by (1) considering two different (and potentially improved) MLR models, one for predicting loudness rating at specified input level and the other for predicting the input level for each loudness category and (2) validating the new models' predictions using an independent set of data. Strong correlations were obtained between predicted and measured data during the validation process with overall root-mean-square errors in the range 10.43-16.78 dB for the prediction of CLS input level, supporting the view that DPOAE I/O measurements can predict CLS loudness ratings and input levels, and thus may be useful for fitting hearing aids.

Latency of tone-burst-evoked auditory brain stem responses and otoacoustic emissions: level, frequency, and rise-time effects.

Simultaneous measurement of auditory brain stem response (ABR) and otoacoustic emission (OAE) delays may provide insights into effects of level, frequency, and stimulus rise-time on cochlear delay. Tone-burst-evoked ABRs and OAEs (TBOAEs) were measured simultaneously in normal-hearing human subjects. Stimuli included a wide range of frequencies (0.5-8 kHz), levels (20-90 dB SPL), and tone-burst rise times. ABR latencies have orderly dependence on these three parameters, similar to previously reported data by Gorga et al. [J. Speech Hear. Res. 31, 87-97 (1988)]. Level dependence of ABR and TBOAE latencies was similar across a wide range of stimulus conditions. At mid-frequencies, frequency dependence of ABR and TBOAE latencies were similar. The dependence of ABR latency on both rise time and level was significant; however, the interaction was not significant, suggesting independent effects. Comparison between ABR and TBOAE latencies reveals that the ratio of TBOAE latency to ABR forward latency (the level-dependent component of ABR total latency) is close to one below 1.5 kHz, but greater than two above 1.5 kHz. Despite the fact that the current experiment was designed to test compatibility with models of reverse-wave propagation, existing models do not completely explain the current data.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves in hearing-impaired humans.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) suppression tuning curves (STCs) were measured in 65 hearing-impaired (HI) subjects at f(2) frequencies of 2.0, 2.8, 4.0, and 5.6 kHz and L(2) levels relative to sensation level (SL) from 10 dB to as much as 50 dB. Best frequency, cochlear-amplifier gain (tip-to-tail difference, T-T), and tuning (Q(ERB)) were estimated from STCs. As with normal-hearing (NH) subjects, T-T differences and Q(ERB) decreased as L(2) increased. T-T differences and Q(ERB) were reduced in HI ears (compared to normal) for conditions in which L(2) was fixed relative to behavioral threshold (dB SL). When STCs were compared with L(2) at constant sound pressure levels (dB SPL), differences between NH and HI subjects were reduced. The large effect of level and small effect of hearing loss were both confirmed by statistical analyses. Therefore, the magnitude of the differences in DPOAE STCs between NH and HI subjects is mainly dependent on the manner in which level (L(2)) is specified. Although this conclusion may appear to be at odds with previous, invasive measures of cochlear-response gain and tuning, the apparent inconsistency may be resolved when the manner of specifying stimulus level is taken into account.

Growth of suppression using distortion-product otoacoustic emission measurements in hearing-impaired humans.

Growth of distortion-product otoacoustic emission suppression was measured in 65 subjects with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (HI). Measurements were made at four probe frequencies (f(2)) and up to five L(2) levels. Eleven suppressor frequencies (f(3)) were used for each f(2), L(2) combination. These data were compared to data from normal-hearing (NH) subjects (Gorga et al., 2011a). In both NH and HI subjects, growth of suppression depended on the relation between f(2) and f(3), such that the slope was close to one when f(3) ≈ f(2), steeper than one when f(3) < f(2), and shallower than one when f(3) > f(2). Differences in growth of suppression between NH and HI subjects were not observed for fixed f(2), L(2) combinations, however large differences were observed in suppressor "threshold" when compared at the same probe sensation level (dB SL). Smaller group differences were observed when compared at the same probe sound-pressure level (dB SPL). Therefore, the extent of these differences depended on how probe level (L(2)) was specified. When the results from NH and HI subjects are compared with each other and with psychophysical studies of masking, differences are observed that have implications for the remediation of mild-to-moderate hearing loss.

Wideband aural acoustic absorbance predicts conductive hearing loss in children.

OBJECTIVE: This study tested the hypothesis that wideband aural absorbance predicts conductive hearing loss (CHL) in children medically classified as having otitis media with effusion. DESIGN: Absorbance was measured in the ear canal over frequencies from 0.25 to 8 kHz at ambient pressure or as a swept tympanogram. CHL was defined using criterion air-bone gaps of 20, 25, and 30 dB at octaves from 0.25 to 4 kHz. A likelihood-ratio predictor of CHL was constructed across frequency for ambient absorbance, and across frequency and pressure for absorbance tympanometry. Performance was evaluated at individual frequencies and for any frequency at which a CHL was present. STUDY SAMPLE: Absorbance and conventional 0.226-kHz tympanograms were measured in children of age three to eight years with CHL and with normal hearing. RESULTS: Absorbance was smaller at frequencies above 0.7 kHz in the CHL group than the control group. Based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, wideband absorbance in ambient and tympanometric tests were significantly better predictors of CHL than tympanometric width, the best 0.226-kHz predictor. Accuracies of ambient and tympanometric wideband absorbance did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Absorbance accurately predicted CHL in children and was more accurate than conventional 0.226-kHz tympanometry.

Reliability of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and their relation to loudness.

The reliability of distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements and their relation to loudness measurements was examined in 16 normal-hearing subjects and 58 subjects with hearing loss. The level of the distortion product (L(d)) was compared across two sessions and resulted in correlations that exceeded 0.90. The reliability of DPOAEs was less when parameters from nonlinear fits to the input/output (I/O) functions were compared across visits. Next, the relationship between DPOAE I/O parameters and the slope of the low-level portion of the categorical loudness scaling (CLS) function (soft slope) was assessed. Correlations of 0.65, 0.74, and 0.81 at 1, 2, and 4 kHz were observed between CLS soft slope and combined DPOAE parameters. Behavioral threshold had correlations of 0.82, 0.83, and 0.88 at 1, 2, and 4 kHz with CLS soft slope. Combining DPOAEs and behavioral threshold provided little additional information. Lastly, a multivariate approach utilizing the entire DPOAE I/O function was used to predict the CLS rating for each input level (dB SPL). Standard error of the estimate when using this method ranged from 2.4 to 3.0 categorical units (CU), suggesting that DPOAE I/O functions can predict CLS measures within the CU step size used in this study (5).

Distribution of standing-wave errors in real-ear sound-level measurements.

Standing waves can cause measurement errors when sound-pressure level (SPL) measurements are performed in a closed ear canal, e.g., during probe-microphone system calibration for distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) testing. Alternative calibration methods, such as forward-pressure level (FPL), minimize the influence of standing waves by calculating the forward-going sound waves separate from the reflections that cause errors. Previous research compared test performance (Burke et al., 2010) and threshold prediction (Rogers et al., 2010) using SPL and multiple FPL calibration conditions, and surprisingly found no significant improvements when using FPL relative to SPL, except at 8 kHz. The present study examined the calibration data collected by Burke et al. and Rogers et al. from 155 human subjects in order to describe the frequency location and magnitude of standing-wave pressure minima to see if these errors might explain trends in test performance. Results indicate that while individual results varied widely, pressure variability was larger around 4 kHz and smaller at 8 kHz, consistent with the dimensions of the adult ear canal. The present data suggest that standing-wave errors are not responsible for the historically poor (8 kHz) or good (4 kHz) performance of DPOAE measures at specific test frequencies.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves in humans.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) suppression data as a function of suppressor level (L(3)) for f(2) frequencies from 0.5 to 8 kHz and L(2) levels from 10 to 60 dB sensation level were used to construct suppression tuning curves (STCs). DPOAE levels in the presence of suppressors were converted into decrement versus L(3) functions, and the L(3) levels resulting in 3 dB decrements were derived by transformed linear regression. These L(3) levels were plotted as a function of f(3) to construct STCs. When f(3) is represented on an octave scale, STCs were similar in shape across f(2) frequency. These STCs were analyzed to provide estimates of gain (tip-to-tail difference) and tuning (Q(ERB)). Both gain and tuning decreased as L(2) increased, regardless of f(2), but the trend with f(2) was not monotonic. A roughly linear relation was observed between gain and tuning at each frequency, such that gain increased by 4-16 dB (mean ≈ 5 dB) for every unit increase in Q(ERB), although the pattern varied with frequency. These findings suggest consistent nonlinear processing across a wide frequency range in humans, although the nonlinear operation range is frequency dependent.

Growth of suppression in humans based on distortion-product otoacoustic emission measurements.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) were used to describe suppression growth in normal-hearing humans. Data were collected at eight f(2) frequencies ranging from 0.5 to 8 kHz for L(2) levels ranging from 10 to 60 dB sensation level. For each f(2) and L(2) combination, suppression was measured for nine or eleven suppressor frequencies (f(3)) whose levels varied from -20 to 85 dB sound pressure level (SPL). Suppression grew nearly linearly when f(3) ≈ f(2), grew more rapidly for f(3) < f(2), and grew more slowly for f(3) > f(2). These results are consistent with physiological and mechanical data from lower animals, as well as previous DPOAE data from humans, although no previous DPOAE study has described suppression growth for as wide a range of frequencies and levels. These trends were evident for all f(2) and L(2) combinations; however, some exceptions were noted. Specifically, suppression growth rate was less steep as a function of f(3) for f(2) frequencies ≤ 1 kHz. Thus, despite the qualitative similarities across frequency, there were quantitative differences related to f(2), suggesting that there may be subtle differences in suppression for frequencies above 1 kHz compared to frequencies below 1 kHz.