Binaural interaction in the brain-stem auditory evoked potential: evidence for a delay line coincidence detection mechanism

Jones, Stephen J.; Poel, J. C. Van Der

doi:10.1016/0168-5597(90)90040-k

Cited by 63 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…BI for the middle latency components are still evident even with interaural time disparities sufficiently large to disrupt binaural fusion. These results suggest that the amplitude of BI components reflect neural processes contributing to localization of the fused image, similar to the proposals of Furst et al (1985) and Jones and Van der Poel (1990). However our data extends their observations and further quantifies the relationship between the BI, lateralization and binaural disparities in dI and dT.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The graded decrease in the amplitude of the BI component of the brainstem potentials with increasing dI and dT may reflect the well-known changes in activity of the El cells to changes in stimulus features of binaural signals. Jones and Van der Poel (1990) observed that as dT was increased from 0 to 0.8 ms, the latency of the BI component of the brainstem potentials increased by approximately half the interaural time difference, without an effect on the duration of the component. They concluded that the brainstem binaural component may reflect (1) sound localization mechanisms sensitive to dT; and (2) the output of binaurally responsive neurons, probably in the superior olivary complex, which are responsive to a particular dT according to the relative length of presynaptic axons relaying inputs from either ear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The authors suggested that whenever the BI component is present, the binaural stimuli are perceived as a single fused image within the head. Jones and Van der Poel (1990) in normal subjects showed that changes in latency of the BI component were observed for interaural timing differences out to 1.0 ms, with no further latency shift noted beyond 1.0 ms. They did not report a similar response for amplitude changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auditory time-intensity cues in the binaural interaction component of the auditory evoked potentials

McPherson

Starr

1995

Hearing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Binaural interaction in the brainstem and middle latency auditory evoked potentials to intensity (dl) and timing differences (dT) between the two ears was studied in 10 normal hearing young adults. A component reflecting binaural interaction in the brainstem potentials occurred at approximately 7 ms and was of largest amplitude when d I and dT were 0. The latency of the binaural interaction component gradually shifted and its amplitude decreased as dl or dT increased and binaural interaction became undetectable when dI = 16 dB or when dT_> 1.6 ms. In the middle latency potentials binaural interaction components peaking at 20, 32, and 45 ms were defined that were also largest when dl and dT = 0. The latency of the interaction did not shift with changes in dT and dl whereas the amplitude gradually decreased but binaural interaction components were still evident even at the largest values of dl (30 dB) and dT (3 ms). Psychophysical judgments of binaural perceptions showed binaural fusion of the stimuli to persist with dT values up to 1.6 ms and that lateralization of the intracranial image was complete when either dT = 1.6 ms or when dl = 16 dB. The results suggest that the presence of a binaural interaction component of auditory brainstem potentials correlates with the fusion of binaural click stimuli and the amplitude of the binaural interaction component correlates inversely with the degree of lateralization of the intracranial image. Binaural interaction components of middle latency potentials persist and continue to change even after the binaural stimuli cannot be fused.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory time-intensity cues in the binaural interaction component of the auditory evoked potentials

McPherson

Starr

1995

Hearing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has been used in other studies to avoid ACT (Jones and van der Poel, 1990;McPherson and Starr, 1995;Brantberg et al, 1999a). Instead, following Levine (1981) and Ito et al (1988), left, right and binaural stimuli were presented randomly without contralateral masking.…”

Section: Recordingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Any signi¢cant deviation from BD = 0 is understood as hint to some non-linearity, i.e., a functional coupling of left and right signals. The BD was analyzed in a number of studies, often as a function of ILD and ITD (Dobie and Berlin, 1979;Dobie and Norton, 1980 ;Ainslie and Boston, 1980;Levine, 1981;Wrege and Starr, 1981;Gerull and Mrowinski, 1984;KellyBallweber and Dobie, 1984;Furst et al, 1985;Ito et al, 1988;McPherson et al, 1989;Jones and van der Poel, 1990;McPherson and Starr, 1995;Jiang, 1996 ;Cone-Wesson et al, 1997;Brantberg et al, 1999a,b). Using 2000 sweeps per stimulus condition Gerull and Mrowinski (1984) contended the null hypothesis BD = 0, i.e., that the binaural response B can be perfectly predicted by the sum of the monaural responses L+R, supporting the view of two independent channels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory brain stem responses evoked by lateralized clicks: is lateralization extracted in the human brain stem?

Riedel

Kollmeier

2002

Hearing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dependence of binaurally evoked auditory brain stem responses and the binaural difference potential on simultaneously presented interaural time and level differences is investigated in order to assess the representation of stimulus lateralization in the brain stem. Auditory brain stem responses to binaural click stimuli with all combinations of three interaural time and three interaural level differences were recorded from 12 subjects and 4 channels. The latency of Jewett wave V is shortest for zero interaural time difference and longest for the trading stimuli. The amplitude of wave V is largest for centrally perceived stimuli, i.e., the diotic and trading stimuli, and smallest for the most laterally perceived stimuli. The latency of the most prominent peak of the binaural difference potential DN1 mainly depends on the interaural time difference. The amplitude of the components of the binaural difference potential, DP13DN1, depends similarly on stimulus conditions as wave V amplitude in the case of the binaural stimuli : smallest amplitudes are found for the most lateral stimuli and largest amplitudes for central stimuli. The results demonstrate that interaural level and time differences are not processed independently. This supports the hypothesis that directional information in humans is already extracted and represented at the level of the brain stem. ß

show abstract

Sound localization in patients with unilateral cochlear implants

Luntz

Brodsky

Watad

et al. 2005

Cochlear Implants International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Binaural interaction in the brain-stem auditory evoked potential: evidence for a delay line coincidence detection mechanism

Cited by 63 publications

References 35 publications

Auditory time-intensity cues in the binaural interaction component of the auditory evoked potentials

Auditory time-intensity cues in the binaural interaction component of the auditory evoked potentials

Auditory brain stem responses evoked by lateralized clicks: is lateralization extracted in the human brain stem?

Sound localization in patients with unilateral cochlear implants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About