Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on interaural discrimination and virtual localization

Smith-Olinde, Laura; Koehnke, Janet; Besing, Joan

doi:10.1121/1.421355

Cited by 27 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of this scale is agrees with how the step sizes varied with ILD both in previous studies (Koehnke et al, 1995;Smith-Olinde et al, 1998;Hawley, 2000) and in the current study. ILD JNDs have also been studied on logarithmic scales in previous studies, including those describing statistical correlations between ITD and ILD JNDs (Hawley, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Consistently low thresholds (for strong performance) were found for the JNDs for the NH listeners in studies like Hawkins and Wightman (1980), Smoski and Trahiotis (1986), Gabriel et al (1992), and Smith-Olinde et al (1998). Note that the performances were measured in subject groups of three or less in each of these studies.…”

Section: Nh Listenersmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…First, it is unclear how to define "normal" binaural hearing. For example, for the case of ITD sensitivity at 500 Hz, data from some studies (Koehnke et al, 1986;Bernstein et al, 1998) suggest that thresholds in normal-hearing (NH) listeners can differ among listeners, while other studies (e.g., Hawkins and Wightman, 1980;Gabriel et al, 1992;Smith-Olinde et al, 1998) report similar strong performances for all tested NH listeners. It is possible that some of the reported poor performance thresholds for NH listeners were the actual result of "hidden impairments" that are not reflected by abnormal pure-tone thresholds on the audiogram, such as related to temporary threshold-shift (TTS), as discussed by Kujawa and Liberman (2009), or to obscure auditory dysfunction (OAD; Saunders and Haggard, 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparison of current-study JNDs to JNDs from previous studies with highly trained subjects. Currentstudy thresholds (᭺) are compared to thresholds from Hawkins and Wightman (1980, ٗ), Koehnke et al (1986, ᭝), Smoski and Trahiotis (1986, þ), Gabriel et al (1992, Â), Smith-Olinde et al (1998, *). Data points for NH listeners from Gabriel et al (1992) and SmithOlinde et al (1998) studies are plotted as means from the set of listeners.…”

Section: Comparisons With Previous Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Narrow-band noises at various center-frequencies have been used in many attempts at measuring sensitivity to time-invariant differences in interaural time delay (ITD) and interaural level difference (ILD) (e.g., Hawkins and Wightman, 1980;Smoski and Trahiotis, 1986;Koehnke et al, 1986;Kinkel, 1990;Gabriel et al, 1992;Holube, 1993;Koehnke et al, 1995;Smith-Olinde et al, 1998;Hawley, 2000). Sensitivity to time-varying interaural differences (varying both in time and in level) is also measured in tasks such as NoSp detection (e.g., Koehnke et al, 1986;Gabriel et al, 1992;Koehnke et al, 1995;Hawley, 2000;Strelcyk and Dau, 2009;Goupell and Litovsky, 2014) and interaural cross-correlation (ICC) discrimination (e.g., Gabriel andColburn, 1981, Koehnke et al, 1986;Kinkel, 1990;Gabriel et al, 1992;Holube, 1993;Koehnke et al, 1995;Goupell and Hartmann, 2006;Goupell and Litovsky, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Relating interaural difference sensitivities for several parameters measured in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Spencer

Hawley

Colburn

2016

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Just-noticeable differences (JNDs) in interaural time delay (ITD), interaural level difference (ILD), and interaural cross-correlation (ICC) were measured with low-and high-frequency noise bands over multiple sessions for 10 normal-hearing (NH) and 11 hearing-impaired (HI) listeners. Individual subject thresholds tended to improve with training then stabilize. Measured JNDs varied over these experienced listeners, for both subject groups and all tasks. Group JNDs were seldom predictable from hearing level. Individual listeners' JNDs were highly correlated across frequency for each task and group, except for ICC in the HI listeners. Further, ITD JNDs almost always significantly correlated with ILD JNDs within a group. Finally, although the ICC JNDs always significantly correlated with the ITD or ILD JNDs for the NH listeners, they often did not for the HI listeners. These findings suggest that little information about binaural sensitivity is added for NH listeners with multiple ITD, ILD, and ICC measures. For HI listeners, however, while ITD and ILD measures are well correlated, information is added with ICC measures. In general, the results suggest that less information is added with JND measures for NH listeners (15 significant correlations) than for HI listeners (six significant correlations).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Nh Listenersmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparisons With Previous Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Relating interaural difference sensitivities for several parameters measured in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Spencer

Hawley

Colburn

2016

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Spatial Hearing and Hearing Aids

Akeroyd

Whitmer

2016

Hearing Aids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial hearing is a central part of everyday listening. The ability to determine the direction of a sound source is a natural and effortless skill that is only remarked on in rare or challenging circumstances, such as when a driver cannot determine the direction of the siren of a passing ambulance. But spatial hearing performance by hearing-impaired listeners is considerably degraded, and generally hearing aids do not offer any benefit.In most circumstances -excepting only if a sound source is exactly directly ahead, above, or behind -the fine details of a sound's waveform at the left ear will differ in some way from those at the right ear. The auditory system is sensitive to these interaural ("between the ears") differences. Imagine that the source is to the right of someone's head. The left ear is further from the source than the right ear, by about 18-20 cm, so the sound will arrive there a fraction of a millisecond after it arrives at the right ear. The left ear is also in the acoustic shadow cast by the head, so the sound's level will be less there than at the right ear. Both interaural cues physically occur at all frequencies, but their importance varies with frequency. The interaural level differences (ILDs) can reach 20 or 30 dB at frequencies around 5-10 kHz, but are less than 5 dB below 500 Hz. ILDs are therefore generally regarded as being most useful at high frequencies. Conversely, the interaural time differences (ITDs) -at most, about 600-800 millionths of a second -are primarily a lowfrequency cue, useful up to around 1500 Hz Many laboratory experiments have demonstrated that normal-hearing listeners are remarkably sensitive to these two cues: at best, people can discriminate changes of about 0.5 dB of ILD or 10 millionths of a second of ITD. But in everyday listening people are never called onto discriminate pure changes in ILD or ITD in isolation: when the direction of a source changes, both cues vary. At best, the discrimination for changes in direction is about 1 degree of spatial angle. This is the "minimal audible angle": one can reliably distinguish the left vs. right direction of two sounds, presented in quiet, 1 degree apart. These measurements can be made directly using very closely-spaced loudspeakers or with robot arms to accurately move loudspeakers by very small amounts. An alternative approach is to use a fixed loudspeaker array with relatively large spacing between loudspeakers, such as 15 degrees, and then measure how inaccurate listeners are at reporting the direction of sounds presented from them.One degree of angle is really not very much: it corresponds to the apparent width of the index fingernail held at arm's length. Comparative measurements in mammals have demonstrated that humans have amongst the best performance: of all species measured so far; only dolphins and elephants do as well or better (Heffner, 2004). It is curious why we should be so good at distinguishing sound direction in quiet. Perhaps it is a by-product -an evolutionary spandrel (Gould and Lewontin, 1979) ...

show abstract

Modeling Horizontal Localization of Complex Sounds in the Impaired and Aided Impaired Auditory System

Goff

Buchholz

Dau

2013

The Technology of Binaural Listening

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on interaural discrimination and virtual localization

Cited by 27 publications

References 34 publications

Relating interaural difference sensitivities for several parameters measured in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Relating interaural difference sensitivities for several parameters measured in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Spatial Hearing and Hearing Aids

Modeling Horizontal Localization of Complex Sounds in the Impaired and Aided Impaired Auditory System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About