Auditory localization and its clinical applications

Tonning, F.-M.

doi:10.3109/00206097509071750

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Localization results in the current study for narrow-band noises in isolation agree well with previously published research for both normal-and impaired-hearing listeners ͑Nor-dlund, 1964;Tonning, 1975;Noble et al, 1994;Besing and Koehnke, 1995͒. When an interferer is added in the localization task, some of the impaired-hearing listeners exhibit a tendency to shift the perceived source location toward the position of the interferer, more so with the high-frequency target signal/low-frequency interfering signal condition than the reverse.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…However, it is well established that individuals with sensorineural hearing loss often have difficulty with binaural processing tasks including interaural time discrimination ͑e.g., Hawkins and Wightman, 1980;Häusler et al, 1983;Smoski and Trahiotis, 1986;Gabriel et al, 1992;Koehnke et al, 1995;Koehnke and Besing, 1996͒, interaural intensity discrimination ͑e.g., Häusler et al, 1983;Gabriel et al, 1992;Koehnke et al, 1995͒, localization ͑e.g., Jonkgees andVeer, 1957;Tonning, 1975;Colburn et al, 1982;Noble et al, 1994͒, and binaural detection ͑e.g., Koehnke et al, 1995;Koehnke and Besing, 1996͒. These studies have typically employed a single target stimulus, either simple ͑pure tones͒ or complex ͑narrow-or wide-band noise, speech͒.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on interaural discrimination and virtual localization

Smith-Olinde

Koehnke

Besing

1998

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-frequency binaural processing was investigated in listeners with normal hearing (NH) and with bilateral high-frequency sensorineural hearing impairment (IH). In experiment 1 just-noticeable-differences for interaural time and interaural intensity were measured using 1/3-octave narrow-band noises (NBNs) centered at 0.5 and 4 kHz. These stimuli were presented in isolation and in different cross-frequency interaural combinations. IH listeners displayed the best interaural time discrimination when the 0.5-kHz NBN was dichotic and the best intensity discrimination when both bands were dichotic. Both NH listeners (time) and IH listeners (time and intensity) displayed the poorest interaural discrimination when the NBNs were presented simultaneously with interaural differences in only the 4-kHz NBN (0.5 kHz NBN dichotic). Localization accuracy was measured in experiment 2 using the 0.5- and 4-kHz NBNs in isolation and with 0.5-kHz target/4-kHz interferer and 4-kHz target/0.5-kHz interferer conditions. Best localization of NH and IH subjects was seen for the 0.5-kHz target, with or without an interferer. Poorest localization of IH subjects was observed for the 4-kHz target and 0.5-kHz interferer. Results suggest that for these IH subjects, localization is most difficult when they are forced to rely on interaural information in a higher-frequency region with conflicting interaural information at low frequencies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on interaural discrimination and virtual localization

Smith-Olinde

Koehnke

Besing

1998

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, changes in listeners' localization patterns may help to differentiate brain lesions at the SOC and IC levels (e.g., Aharonson and Furst, 2001) (see section 4). However, it is still unclear to what degree lesions of the vestibular system affect directional hearing (Diamant, 1946;Jongkees and Veer, 1958;Nordlund, 1964;Tonning, 1975). Since the listener remains stationary during sound presentation in directional audiometry, it is very unlikely, as Blauert (1974Blauert ( /2001 points out, that such testing can reveal any disorder of the vestibular system.…”

Section: Directional Audiometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Spatial Perception: Auditory Localization

Łȩtowski¹,

Letowski²

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

show abstract

“…Those binaural factors that contribute to a listening advantage include; binaural summation [8,28,40,45], the head shadow effect [8,20,38,44,48], localization [26,27,29,35,37,41,49], and binaural release from masking [8,13,21,23,29]. Research conducted primarily with adults suggests that people with only one normally hearing ear experience a variety of listening difficulties, including difficulty in understanding speech under quiet and noisy conditions regardless of the location of the sound source [8,19,20,44].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%