Changes in distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) fine structure due to contralateral acoustic stimulation

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. 3853-3853
Author(s):  
Manfred Mauermann ◽  
Birger Kollmeier
Keyword(s):  
Fine Structure ◽  
Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation

scholarly journals Changes in Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission Caused by Contralateral Broadband Noise

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Ozimek ◽  
Andrzej Wicher
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Wide Frequency Range ◽  
Broadband Noise ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Frequency Range ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Stimulation Level ◽  
Contralateral Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
The Mean

Abstract The main purpose of this investigation was to measure the effect of contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS) on distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) in twenty human ears, for a ratio of primary tones f2/f1 = 1.22 and a wide frequency range of f2 (1.4-9 kHz), for two intensity levels of primary tones (L1 = 60 dB SPL; L2 = 50 dB SPL and L1 = 70 dB SPL; L2 = 60 dB SPL) and two intensity levels of CAS (50 and 60 dB SPL). It was found that in the presence of CAS, in the majority of cases the DPOAE level decreased (suppression), but it might also increase (enhancement) or remain unchanged depending on the frequency. The mean suppression level of the component of the frequency fDP = 2f1 f2 might be approximated by a linearly decreasing function of the f2 frequency of primary tones. The slope of this function was negative and increased with an increase of the contralateral stimulation level. The higher was the contralateral noise level the greater was the suppression. For the fDP level below about 15 dB SPL, suppression was observed in a substantial number of measurement cases (in about 85% of all measured cases on average). When the fDP level was higher than 15 dB SPL, only suppression (not enhancement) was observed.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission fine structure as an indicator of combination-tone-mediated masking release

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (4) ◽  
pp. 2408-2409
Author(s):  
James D. Lewis ◽  
Emily C. Clark ◽  
Judy G. Kopun ◽  
Walt Jesteadt ◽  
Stephen T. Neely ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fine Structure ◽  
Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Masking Release

scholarly journals Correlation and Reliability of Behavioral and Otoacoustic-Emission Estimates of Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex Strength in Humans

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam I. Marrufo-Pérez ◽  
Peter T. Johannesen ◽  
Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Broadband Noise ◽  
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission ◽  
Detection Thresholds ◽  
Medial Olivocochlear Reflex ◽  
Distortion Product ◽  
Healthy Humans ◽  
Medial Olivocochlear ◽  
Tone Detection

The roles of the medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR) in human hearing have been widely investigated but remain controversial. We reason that this may be because the effects of MOCR activation on cochlear mechanical responses can be assessed only indirectly in healthy humans, and the different methods used to assess those effects possibly yield different and/or unreliable estimates. One aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between three methods often employed to assess the strength of MOCR activation by contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS). We measured tone detection thresholds (N = 28), click-evoked otoacoustic emission (CEOAE) input/output (I/O) curves (N = 18), and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) I/O curves (N = 18) for various test frequencies in the presence and the absence of CAS (broadband noise of 60 dB SPL). As expected, CAS worsened tone detection thresholds, suppressed CEOAEs and DPOAEs, and horizontally shifted CEOAE and DPOAE I/O curves to higher levels. However, the CAS effect on tone detection thresholds was not correlated with the horizontal shift of CEOAE or DPOAE I/O curves, and the CAS-induced CEOAE suppression was not correlated with DPOAE suppression. Only the horizontal shifts of CEOAE and DPOAE I/O functions were correlated with each other at 1.5, 2, and 3 kHz. A second aim was to investigate which of the methods is more reliable. The test–retest variability of the CAS effect was high overall but smallest for tone detection thresholds and CEOAEs, suggesting that their use should be prioritized over the use of DPOAEs. Many factors not related with the MOCR, including the limited parametric space studied, the low resolution of the I/O curves, and the reduced numbers of observations due to data exclusion likely contributed to the weak correlations and the large test–retest variability noted. These findings can help us understand the inconsistencies among past studies and improve our understanding of the functional significance of the MOCR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document