Frequency dependence of binaural performance in listeners with impaired binaural hearing

Abstract

Binaural performance was measured as a function of stimulus frequency for four impaired listeners, each with bilaterally symmetric audiograms. The subjects had various degrees and configurations of audiometric losses: two had high-frequency, sensorineural losses; one had a flat sensorineural loss; and one had multiple sclerosis with normal audiometric thresholds. Just noticeable differences (jnd's) in interaural time, interaural intensity, and interaural correlation as well as detection thresholds for NoSo and NoS pi conditions were obtained for narrow-band noise stimuli at octave frequencies from 250-4000 Hz. Performance of the impaired listeners was generally poorer than that of normal-hearing listeners, although it was comparable to normal in a few instances. The patterns of binaural performance showed no apparent relation to the audiometric patterns; even the two subjects with similar degree and configuration of hearing loss have very different binaural performance, both in the level and frequency dependence of their performance. The frequency dependence of performance on individual tests is irregular enough that one cannot confidently interpolate between octaves. In addition, it appears that no subset of the measurements is adequate to characterize the performance in the rest of the measurements with the exception that, within limits, interaural correlation discrimination and NoS pi detection performance are related.

Relating binaural pitch perception to the individual listener’s auditory profile

“…However, the group difference was not significant for the resulting BMLDs (500 Hz: p ¼ 0.276, 1 kHz: p ¼ 0.066, mean: p ¼ 0.120, two-sample t-tests), and most HI listeners obtained BMLDs within the NH range. This is consistent with earlier reports of BMLDs (Staffel et al, 1990;Gabriel et al, 1992;Strelcyk and Dau, 2009), in which HI listeners showed elevated thresholds in both the diotic and dichotic conditions, leading to less pronounced differences with NH listeners in terms of masking release.…”

Relations between perceptual measures of temporal processing, auditory-evoked brainstem responses and speech intelligibility in noise

“…This fine structure evokes phaselocked activity, i.e., synchronized timing of action potentials, in the subsequent stages of neural processing. Deficits in TFS processing have been found in some earlier studies on, e.g., pure-tone frequency discrimination (e.g., Turner and Nelson, 1982;Freyman and Nelson, 1991), low-rate frequency-modulation detection (e.g., Zurek and Formby, 1981;Moore and Skrodzka, 2002;Buss et al, 2004;) and binaural masked detection (e.g., Hall et al, 1984;Gabriel et al, 1992). Also, several studies suggested a relation between ageing and deficits in TFS processing as well as speech reception (e.g., Pichora-Fuller and Schneider, 1992;Strouse et al, 1998;Schneider et al, 2002;Ross et al, 2007;Hopkins et al, 2008;).…”

Masking-level differences in older adults: The effect of the level of the masking noise

“…Koehnke, Culotta, Hawley,and Colburn (1995), who studied II listeners with sensorineural hearing loss, noted that most, but not all, of these listeners had smaller MLDs at 500 Hz. Gabriel, Koehnke, and Colburn (1992) Figure 3. Decibel increase in dichotic threshold as a function of the amount ofIAA for the younger and older subjects in the present study, and for the subjects in the study of Colburn and Latimer (1978), who were tested in dichotic conditions nearly identical to ours (see note 3).…”