nach oben

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Erschienen in:

01.12.2009

Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent

verfasst von: Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda, Peter T. Johannesen

Erschienen in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Ausgabe 4/2009

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

When two pure tones (or primaries) of slightly different frequencies (f ₁ and f ₂) are presented to the ear, new frequency components are generated by nonlinear interaction of the primaries within the cochlea. These new components can be recorded in the ear canal as otoacoustic emissions (OAE). The level of the 2f ₁−f ₂ OAE component is known as the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and is regarded as an indicator of the physiological state of the cochlea. The current view is that maximal level DPOAEs occur for primaries that produce equal excitation at the f ₂ cochlear region, but this notion cannot be directly tested in living humans because it is impossible to record their cochlear responses while monitoring their ear canal DPOAE levels. On the other hand, it has been claimed that the temporal masking curve (TMC) method of inferring human basilar membrane responses allows measurement of the levels of equally effective pure tones at any given cochlear site. The assumptions of this behavioral method, however, lack firm physiological support in humans. Here, the TMC method was applied to test the current notion on the conditions that maximize DPOAE levels in humans. DPOAE and TMC results were mutually consistent for frequencies of 1 and 4 kHz and for levels below around 65 dB sound pressure level. This match supports the current view on the generation of maximal level DPOAEs as well as the assumptions of the behavioral TMC method.

Cooper NP. Compression in the peripheral auditoy system. In: Bacon SP, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Compression: From Cochlea to Cochlear Implants. New York, Springer, pp. 18–61, 2004.CrossRef

Dorn PA, Konrad-Martin D, Neely ST, Keefe DH, Cyr E, Gorga MP. Distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:3119–3131, 2001.CrossRefPubMed

Duifhuis H. Consequences of peripheral frequency selectivity for nonsimultaneous masking. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 54:1471–1488, 1973.CrossRefPubMed

Fahey PF, Stagner BB, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Nonlinear interactions that could explain distortion product interference response areas. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108:1786–1802, 2000.CrossRefPubMed

Gaskill SA, Brown AM. The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1–f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88:821–839, 1990.CrossRefPubMed

Goldstein JL. Auditory nonlinearity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 41:676–689, 1967.CrossRefPubMed

Gorga MP, Neely ST, Ohlrich B, Hoover B, Redner J, Peters J. From laboratory to clinic: a large scale study of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in ears with normal hearing and ears with hearing loss. Ear Hear. 18:440–455, 1997.CrossRefPubMed

He NJ, Schmiedt RA. Fine structure of the 2f1–f2 acoustic distortion product: changes with primary level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94:2659–2669, 1993.CrossRefPubMed

Heitmann J, Waldmann B, Schnitzler H, Plinkert PK, Zenner H. Suppression of distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) near 2f1–f2 removes DP-gram fine structure—evidence for a secondary generator. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:1527–1531, 1998.CrossRef

Johannesen PT, Lopez-Poveda EA. Cochlear nonlinearity in normal-hearing subjects as inferred psychophysically and from distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124:2149–2163, 2008.CrossRefPubMed

Johnson TA, Neely ST, Garner CA, Gorga MP. Influence of primary-level and primary-frequency ratios on human distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119:418–428, 2006.CrossRefPubMed

Kalluri R, Shera CA. Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109:622–637, 2001.CrossRefPubMed

Kemp DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 64:1386–1391, 1978.CrossRefPubMed

Kummer P, Janssen T, Arnold W. The level and growth behavior of the 2 f1–f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission and its relationship to auditory sensitivity in normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:3431–3444, 1998.CrossRefPubMed

Kummer P, Janssen T, Hulin P, Arnold W. Optimal L(1)–L(2) primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans. Hear Res. 146:47–56, 2000.CrossRefPubMed

Levitt H. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49(Suppl 2)1971.

Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. The clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear. 11:144–154, 1990.CrossRefPubMed

Lopez-Poveda EA, Alves-Pinto A. A variant temporal-masking-curve method for inferring peripheral auditory compression. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123:1544–1554, 2008.CrossRefPubMed

Lopez-Poveda EA, Johannesen PT. Otoacoustic emission theories can be tested with behavioral methods. In: Lopez-Poveda EA, Palmer AR, Meddis R (eds) Advances in Auditory Research: Physiology, Psychophysics, and Models. New York, Springer.

Lopez-Poveda EA, Plack CJ, Meddis R. Cochlear nonlinearity between 500 and 8000 Hz in listeners with normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113:951–960, 2003.CrossRefPubMed

Lopez-Poveda EA, Plack CJ, Meddis R, Blanco JL. Cochlear compression in listeners with moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Hear Res. 205:172–183, 2005.CrossRefPubMed

Martin GK, Jassir D, Stagner BB, Whitehead ML, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Locus of generation for the 2f1–f2 vs 2f2–f1 distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing humans revealed by suppression tuning, onset latencies, and amplitude correlations. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:1957–1971, 1998.CrossRefPubMed

Mauermann M, Kollmeier B. Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) input/output functions and the influence of the second DPOAE source. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116:2199–2212, 2004.CrossRefPubMed

Mills DM, Rubel EW. Variation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions with furosemide injection. Hear Res. 77:183–199, 1994.CrossRefPubMed

Moore BC, Glasberg BR. Growth of forward masking for sinusoidal and noise maskers as a function of signal delay; implications for suppression in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73:1249–1259, 1983.CrossRefPubMed

Neely ST, Johnson TA, Gorga MP. Distortion-product otoacoustic emission measured with continuously varying stimulus level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117:1248–1259, 2005.CrossRefPubMed

Nelson DA, Freyman RL. Temporal resolution in sensorineural hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 81:709–720, 1987.CrossRefPubMed

Nelson DA, Schroder AC. Peripheral compression as a function of stimulus level and frequency region in normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115:2221–2233, 2004.CrossRefPubMed

Nelson DA, Schroder AC, Wojtczak M. A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:2045–2064, 2001.CrossRefPubMed

Oxenham AJ, Moore BC. Modeling the additivity of nonsimultaneous masking. Hear Res 80:105–118, 1994.CrossRefPubMed

Oxenham AJ, Moore BC. Additivity of masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98:1921–1934, 1995.CrossRefPubMed

Oxenham AJ, Moore BC, Vickers DA. Short-term temporal integration: evidence for the influence of peripheral compression. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:3676–3687, 1997.CrossRefPubMed

Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ. A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:3666–3675, 1997.CrossRefPubMed

Plack CJ, Drga V. Psychophysical evidence for auditory compression at low characteristic frequencies. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113:1574–1586, 2003.CrossRefPubMed

Plack CJ, Drga V, Lopez-Poveda EA. Inferred basilar-membrane response functions for listeners with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115:1684–1695, 2004.CrossRefPubMed

Rhode WS. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions and basilar membrane vibration in the 6–9 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122:2725–2737, 2007.CrossRefPubMed

Robles L, Ruggero MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol. Rev. 81:1305–1352, 2001.PubMed

Rosengard PS, Oxenham AJ, Braida LD. Comparing different estimates of cochlear compression in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117:3028–3041, 2005.CrossRefPubMed

Ruggero MA. Distortion in those good vibrations. Curr. Biol. 3:755–758, 1993.CrossRefPubMed

Ruggero MA, Rich NC, Recio A, Narayan SS, Robles L. Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:2151–2163, 1997.CrossRefPubMed

Shaffer LA, Withnell RH, Dhar S, Lilly DJ, Goodman SS, Harmon KM. Sources and mechanisms of DPOAE generation: implications for the prediction of auditory sensitivity. Ear Hear. 24:367–379, 2003.CrossRefPubMed

Shera CA, Guinan JJ, Jr. Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105:782–798, 1999.CrossRefPubMed

Shera CA, Guinan JJ, Jr. Cochlear traveling-wave amplification, suppression, and beamforming probed using noninvasive calibration of intracochlear distortion sources. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121:1003–1016, 2007.CrossRefPubMed

Whitehead ML, Stagner BB, McCoy MJ, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Dependence of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions on primary levels in normal and impaired ears. II. Asymmetry in L1,L2 space. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97:2359–2377, 1995.CrossRefPubMed

Wojtczak M, Oxenham AJ. Pitfalls in behavioral estimates of basilar-membrane compression in humans. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125:270–281, 2009.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent
verfasst von: Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda
Peter T. Johannesen
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2009
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Ausgabe 4/2009
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Elektronische ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-009-0176-9

Update HNO

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

HNO-Op. auch mit über 90?

Intrakapsuläre Tonsillektomie gewinnt an Boden

Bilateraler Hörsturz hat eine schlechte Prognose

Update HNO

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2009

Discrimination of Time-Reversed Harmonic Complexes by Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Interaural Time-Delay Sensitivity in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users: Effects of Pulse Rate, Modulation Rate, and Place of Stimulation

Anatomy of the Distal Incus in Humans

On- and Off-Frequency Forward Masking by Schroeder-Phase Complexes

Dynamic Displacement of Normal and Detached Semicircular Canal Cupula

Basilar Membrane Responses to Noise at a Basal Site of the Chinchilla Cochlea: Quasi-Linear Filtering

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

HNO-Op. auch mit über 90?

Intrakapsuläre Tonsillektomie gewinnt an Boden

Bilateraler Hörsturz hat eine schlechte Prognose

Update HNO