Mechanical and acoustical influences on spontaneous oto-acoustic emissions

Schloth, Eberhard; Zwicker, Eberhard

doi:10.1016/0378-5955(83)90063-1

Cited by 109 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Phase leads have also been observed in direct measures of basilar membrane motion during electrical stimulation of the MOC system (Cooper and Guinan 2003), although whether these effects are related to changes in SFOAEs is unknown. While we verified absence of MEMR to the CAS, note that alterations of middle ear impedance would produce similar upward frequency shifts (e.g., Kemp 1979a;Wilson and Sutton 1981;Schloth and Zwicker 1983) due to a change in the phase of the stapes reflectance (Shera 2003).…”

Section: Frequency Shifts In Threshold Minima and Soaessupporting

confidence: 54%

“…These interactions may not be negligible, as SOAErelated vibrations have been estimated to be as much as 30 dB larger than those evoked by tones of equivalent ear canal SPL (Powers et al 1995). The fact that such vibrations are often not perceived unless perturbed (Zurek 1981;Schloth and Zwicker 1983) suggests that some degree of neural adaptation or inhibition has occurred more centrally. Reducing SOAE-related background activity would reduce the aforementioned effects and increase the signal-tonoise ratio of neural responses to external sounds, thus improving signal detection.…”

Section: Masking By Soaesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions and Hearing Threshold Fine Structure

Dewey

Lee

Dhar

2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Medial olivocochlear (MOC) influence on cochlear mechanics can be noninvasively, albeit indirectly, explored via the effects of contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS) on otoacoustic emissions. CASmediated effects are particularly pronounced for spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs), which are typically reduced in amplitude and shifted upward in frequency by CAS. We investigated whether similar frequency shifts and magnitude reductions were observed behaviorally in the fine structure of puretone hearing thresholds, a phenomenon thought to share a common underlying mechanism with SOAEs. In normal-hearing listeners, fine-resolution thresholds were obtained over a narrow frequency range centered on the frequency of an SOAE, both in the absence and presence of 60-dB SPL broadband CAS. While CAS shifted threshold fine structure patterns and SOAEs upward in frequency by a comparable amount, little reduction in the presence or depth of fine structure was observed at frequencies near those of SOAEs. In fact, CAS typically improved thresholds, particularly at threshold minima, and increased fine structure depth when reductions in the amplitude of the associated SOAE were less than 10 dB. Additional measurements made at frequencies distant from SOAEs, or near SOAEs that were more dramatically reduced in amplitude by the CAS, revealed that CAS tended to elevate thresholds and reduce threshold fine structure depth. The results suggest that threshold fine structure is sensitive to MOC-mediated changes in cochlear gain, but that SOAEs complicate the interpretation of threshold measurements at nearby frequencies, perhaps due to masking or other interference effects. Both threshold fine structure and SOAEs may be significant sources of intersubject and intrasubject variability in psychoacoustic investigations of MOC function.

show abstract

Section: Frequency Shifts In Threshold Minima and Soaessupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Masking By Soaesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions and Hearing Threshold Fine Structure

Dewey

Lee

Dhar

2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correspondingly, the oval window will be stiffer. This reduces the phase shift of reflection at the oval window, which adequately explains the increase of SOAE frequencies as generally observed for an increase and a decrease of the static pressure in the ear canal (Schloth and Zwicker 1983;Hauser et al 1993;Van Dijk et al 2011). Note that the slight negative pressure that is usually needed to obtain the lowest SOAE frequency suggests that under normal conditions, the human tympanic membrane is slightly tensed medially (Schloth and Zwicker 1983;Hauser et al 1993;Van Dijk et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 52%

“…Also, it changes the acoustic load on the inner ear and, in particular, on the inner ear SOAE generators. This is believed to account for the shift of SOAE frequencies (Schloth and Zwicker 1983;Shera 2003;Van Dijk et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effects of Air Pressure on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions of Lizards

Dijk

Manley²

2013

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small changes of air pressure outside the eardrum of five lizard species led to changes in frequency, level, and peak width of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAE). In contrast to humans, these changes generally occurred at very small pressures (G20 mbar). As in humans, SOAE amplitudes were generally reduced. Changes of SOAE frequency were both positive and negative, while in humans, they are mostly positive. In addition, in lizards, these effects often showed obvious hysteresis and non-repeatability. The correlation between peak width and height was negative in two species (comparable to humans) and positive in one species. In two other species, no correlation was found. Consequently, a simple oscillator model that explained the negative correlation in humans could not be generally applied to lizards. This presumably reflects the fact that in lizards, the spontaneous otoacoustic emission of sound from the ear consists of a combination of stable oscillations (as in humans), unstable narrow-band oscillations, and broad-band emissions, evident as "plateaus" in emission spectra.

show abstract

Audible and Annoying Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions: A Case Study

Penner

1988

Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

\s=b\Four types of evidence indicate that spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) might be the basis of one patient's problematic tinnitus. First, when SOAEs were suppressed, the tinnitus was inaudible. Second, pitch matches to the lowest pitch of the tinnitus corresponded to the lowest frequency of the SOAE. Third, there was a more intense multicomponent SOAE in the right than in the left ear, and patient claimed that the tinnitus was louder in the right ear. Fourth, the patient's SOAEs were unstable and for this reason they might be audible. One practical consequences of this research is that patients with pathological tinnitus (which keeps them awake at night and interferes with concentration) should be tested for SOAEs. Because SOAEs are abolished by aspirin, it is possible that some unusual cases of problematic tinnitus could be easily treated.

show abstract

Mechanical and acoustical influences on spontaneous oto-acoustic emissions

Cited by 109 publications

References 14 publications

Effects of Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions and Hearing Threshold Fine Structure

Effects of Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions and Hearing Threshold Fine Structure

The Effects of Air Pressure on Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions of Lizards

Audible and Annoying Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions: A Case Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About