1994
DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3703.662
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Age Effects on Measures of Auditory Duration Discrimination

Abstract: This study examined auditory temporal sensitivity in young adult and elderly listeners using psychophysical tasks that measured duration discrimination. Listeners in the experiments were divided into groups of young and elderly subjects with normal hearing sensitivity and with mild-to-moderate sloping sensorineural hearing loss. Temporal thresholds in all tasks were measured with an adaptive forced-choice procedure using tonal stimuli centered at 500 Hz and 4000 Hz. Difference limens for duration were measured… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
87
0
3

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 154 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
9
87
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The ability to discriminate between gaps of different duration was significantly better in the young rats in comparison with old rats: the mean Weber's ratios were 0.39 and 0.44 for young rats and 0.65 and 0.74 for old rats. Although there is a lack of animal studies focused of gap duration discrimination, our data correspond with the results of psychophysical studies in humans that show an age-related deficit in the ability to discriminate between gaps of different durations [11,12,15,16,50,51], e.g. Fitzgibbons and…”
Section: Accepted M Manuscriptsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The ability to discriminate between gaps of different duration was significantly better in the young rats in comparison with old rats: the mean Weber's ratios were 0.39 and 0.44 for young rats and 0.65 and 0.74 for old rats. Although there is a lack of animal studies focused of gap duration discrimination, our data correspond with the results of psychophysical studies in humans that show an age-related deficit in the ability to discriminate between gaps of different durations [11,12,15,16,50,51], e.g. Fitzgibbons and…”
Section: Accepted M Manuscriptsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…GDT is the smallest duration of a silent interval in a sound that a subject is able to detect; GDDL is defined as the smallest change in the duration of a silent interval that a subject may discriminate from the duration of another interval. A significant deficit in gap detection [4-6, 13, 14] as well as in gap discrimination [11,12,15,16] has been shown in older people.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The consequences of presbycusis can be described as a function of central or peripheral aging, or as a function of peripheral hearing loss. Decline in the ability to discriminate speech, especially in complex acoustic environments, likely reflects impaired processing of acoustic information within the central auditory neuraxis (Dubno et al, 1984;Moore et al, 1992;Fitzgibbons and Gordon-Salant, 1994;Schneider et al, 1994;Snell, 1997;Strouse et al, 1998;Tremblay et al, 2002Tremblay et al, , 2003Ostroff et al, 2003). Functional and neurochemical studies in animal models suggest that sensory aging may begin as a slow peripheral deafferentation, which triggers a compensatory downregulation of central inhibitory amino acid neurotransmitter function (Caspary et al, 1990Schmolesky et al, 2000;Mendelson and Ricketts, 2001;Leventhal et al, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the HI listeners in this study were on average older than the NH listeners in the study by Wojtczak et al (2012) used as a control group. A large number of studies have reported clear effects of age on gap detection and gap-duration discrimination for both within-channel and across-channel markers (Fitzgibbons and Gordon-Salant 1994;Schneider et al 1994;He et al 1999;Lister et al 2000Lister et al , 2002Lister and Roberts 2005). Since the NH and HI listeners compared in this study were not age-matched, some of the observed differences between their data may reflect poorer coding of temporal information or a reduced ability to integrate temporal information across frequency due to the age of the HI listeners.…”
Section: Age Versus Hearing Lossmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…A number of studies have shown that temporal processing deteriorates with age even in the absence of hearing loss (e.g., Fitzgibbons and Gordon-Salant 1994;Strouse et al 1998;Fitzgibbons et al 2007). The effect of age has been generally attributed to changes in central neural processing, although some evidence suggests that the effect may have a peripheral component that is not associated with presbycusis.…”
Section: Fig 4 Correlation Between Thresholds For Detecting a 40-msmentioning
confidence: 99%