The Occlusion Effect in Bone Conduction Hearing

Goldstein, David P.; Hayes, Claude S.

doi:10.1044/jshr.0802.137

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar results were reported by Klodd & Edgerton (1977) and Dean & Martin (2000), who found greater perception occlusion effects when the stimulation was at the forehead than at the mastoid. However, it was not reported by Goldstein & Hayes (1971), who investigated the ear-canal sound pressure and hearing threshold improvement with occlusion of the ear canal. They reported similar occlusion effects and differences between sound pressure and thresholds from both stimulation positions.…”

Section: Occlusion Effectmentioning

confidence: 76%

A model of the occlusion effect with bone-conducted stimulation

Stenfelt

Reinfeldt

2007

International Journal of Audiology

110

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An acoustical model using simplified ear anatomy was designed to predict the ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect in humans. These predictions were compared perceptually as well as with ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect measurements using a foam earplug with shallow insertion, a foam earplug with deep insertion into the bony part of the ear canal, and a circumaural earmuff. There was good resemblance between model predictions and ear-canal sound pressure measurements. It was also found that all occlusion positions, even deep ear-canal occlusion, produced noticeable occlusion effects. With the bone-conduction transducer at the forehead, the perceived occlusion effect was close to that obtained from ear-canal sound pressure data in the 0.3 to 2 kHz frequency range; when the stimulation was at the mastoid the difference between the perceived and measured ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect was around 10 dB at frequencies below 1 kHz. Further, the occlusion effect was obtained in two clinical settings: with supra-aural earphones (TDH39), and insert earphones (CIR22). Although both transducers produced occlusion effects, insert earphones produced a greater effect than surpa-aural earphones at the low frequencies.

show abstract

Section: Occlusion Effectmentioning

confidence: 76%

A model of the occlusion effect with bone-conducted stimulation

Stenfelt

Reinfeldt

2007

International Journal of Audiology

110

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possibility might be to reduce the intensity of the bone-conduction stimuli required to elicit an ASSR by occluding the ear canals. The occlusion effect reduces behavioral pure-tone thresholds in adults by an average of 16 and 8 dB for 500 and 1000 Hz long-duration bone-conduction stimuli (Dirks & Swindeman, 1967;Goldstein & Hayes, 1965). Dimitrijevic et al (2002) estimated bone-conduction ASSR thresholds with occluded ears; however, because they used a forehead placement for the bone oscillator, which increases thresholds by 14 and 8.5 dB (ANSI, 1996), there was no net decrease in intensity of the stimulus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artifactual Responses When Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses

Small

Stapells

2004

Ear and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The goal of this study was to investigate, in hearing-impaired participants who could not hear the stimuli, the possibility of artifactual auditory steady-state responses (ASSRs) when stimuli are presented at high intensities.Design: ASSRs to single (60 dB HL) and multiple (20 to 50 dB HL; 500 to 4000 Hz) bone-conduction stimuli as well as single 114 to 120 dB HL air-conduction stimuli, were obtained using the Rotman MASTER system, using analog-to-digital (A/D) conversion rates of 500, 1000, and 1250 Hz. Responses (p < 0.05) were considered artifactual when their numbers exceeded that expected by chance. In some conditions, we also obtained ASSRs to "alternated" stimuli (stimuli inverted and ASSRs to the two polarities averaged). A total of 17 subjects were tested. Conclusions: High-intensity air-or bone-conduction stimuli can produce spurious ASSRs, especially for 500 and 1000 Hz carrier frequencies. High-amplitude stimulus artifact can result in energy that is aliased to exactly the modulation frequency. Choice of signal conditioning (electroencephalogram filter slope and low-pass cutoff) and processing (A/D rate) can avoid spurious responses due to aliasing. However, artifactual responses due to other causes may still occur for bone-conduction stimuli 50 dB HL and higher (and possibly for high-level air conduction). Because the phases of these spurious responses do not invert with inversion of stimulus, the possibility of nonauditory physiologic responses cannot be ruled out. The clinical implications of these results are that artifactual responses may occur for any patient for bone-conduction stimuli at levels greater than 40 dB HL and for highintensity air-conduction stimuli used to assess patients with profound hearing loss. Results

show abstract

“…(25). Results for both volumevelocity sources are reported in Table III Table IV shows our calculated objective and subjective occlusion effect for the E-A-R plug assuming an insertion depth of li ---9.2 mm, together with occlusion effects measured by Huizing (1960) and Goldstein and Hayes (1965) for two other devices. Because all authors evaluated different devices, we should focus here on the differences between objective and subjective occlusion effects rather than on the absolute values.…”

Section: Occlusion Effect For Earplugsmentioning

confidence: 96%

The use of acoustical test fixtures for the measurement of hearing protector attenuation. Part II: Modeling the external ear, simulating bone conduction, and comparing test fixture and real-ear data

Schroeter¹,

Poesselt²

1986

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates two main features of the human head which influence the measured attenuation of circumaural and intraaural hearing protection devices (HPDs): the external ear and the different pathways of bone conduction. A theoretical model for the external ear shows that its influence on the insertion loss of HPDs, on the sensitivity level of headphones or earphones, and on the insertion gain of hearing aids, all can be described by one equation. While it is not necessary to simulate the eardrum impedance in order to measure the insertion loss of earmuffs and the sensitivity level of headphones with acoustical test fixtures (ATFs), the required accuracy of an ear simulator is more stringent when the same measurements are performed on intraaural devices. For the evaluation of HPDs, bone conduction plays an important role. We have developed a model to estimate HPD-dependent bone conduction effects. The model includes two bone conduction sources: one in the external ear and one in the middle ear. The model explains, for example, the occlusion effect of HPDs and the masking error at low frequencies due to physiological noise that arises when real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) measurements are made. Consequently, objectively measured insertion loss can now be used to predict REAT with improved accuracy. ATF and REAT data are compared using nine earmuffs and nine earplugs. In the majority of cases, the two sets of data agree well. Discrepancies are discussed.

show abstract

The Occlusion Effect in Bone Conduction Hearing

Cited by 31 publications

References 0 publications

A model of the occlusion effect with bone-conducted stimulation

A model of the occlusion effect with bone-conducted stimulation

Artifactual Responses When Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses

The use of acoustical test fixtures for the measurement of hearing protector attenuation. Part II: Modeling the external ear, simulating bone conduction, and comparing test fixture and real-ear data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About