scholarly journals Amplitude modulation depth discrimination in hearing‐impaired and normal‐hearing listeners

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. 3859-3859
Author(s):  
Stephan D. Ewert ◽  
Jutta Volmer ◽  
Torsten Dau ◽  
Jesko Verhey
Keyword(s):  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Depth ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Depth Discrimination

scholarly journals Contribution of onset/offset information of modulation to amplitude modulation depth discrimination

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. EL111-EL115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek R. Edwards ◽  
Jungmee Lee ◽  
Jennifer Andrews ◽  
Aileen Wong
Keyword(s):  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Depth ◽  
Depth Discrimination

scholarly journals Association of Auditory Steady State Responses with Perception of Temporal Modulations and Speech in Noise

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venugopal Manju ◽  
Kizhakke Kodiyath Gopika ◽  
Pitchai Muthu Arivudai Nambi
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Depth ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Behavioral Method ◽  
Modulation Detection ◽  
Auditory Steady State Responses ◽  
40 Hz

Amplitude modulations in the speech convey important acoustic information for speech perception. Auditory steady state response (ASSR) is thought to be physiological correlate of amplitude modulation perception. Limited research is available exploring association between ASSR and modulation detection ability as well as speech perception. Correlation of modulation detection thresholds (MDT) and speech perception in noise with ASSR was investigated in twofold experiments. 30 normal hearing individuals and 11 normal hearing individuals within age range of 18–24 years participated in experiments 1 and 2, respectively. MDTs were measured using ASSR and behavioral method at 60 Hz, 80 Hz, and 120 Hz modulation frequencies in the first experiment. ASSR threshold was obtained by estimating the minimum modulation depth required to elicit ASSR (ASSR-MDT). There was a positive correlation between behavioral MDT and ASSR-MDT at all modulation frequencies. In the second experiment, ASSR for amplitude modulation (AM) sweeps at four different frequency ranges (30–40 Hz, 40–50 Hz, 50–60 Hz, and 60–70 Hz) was recorded. Speech recognition threshold in noise (SRTn) was estimated using staircase procedure. There was a positive correlation between amplitude of ASSR for AM sweep with frequency range of 30–40 Hz and SRTn. Results of the current study suggest that ASSR provides substantial information about temporal modulation and speech perception.

Temporal integration functions of amplitude modulation depth discrimination: can multiple‐looks model explain this

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. 3860-3860
Author(s):  
Jungmee Lee ◽  
Derek Edwards ◽  
Jennifer Andrews ◽  
Heather Murray
Keyword(s):  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Depth ◽  
Temporal Integration ◽  
Depth Discrimination

Frequency Modulation Detection by Normally Hearing and Profoundly Hearing-Impaired Listeners

1987 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 558-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken W. Grant
Keyword(s):  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Frequency Modulation ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Frequency Difference ◽  
Constant Amplitude ◽  
Modulation Detection ◽  
Frequency Modulation Detection ◽  
Frequency Modulations

The ability of normally hearing and profoundly hearing-impaired subjects to detect frequency modulations was evaluated under conditions where the amplitudes of the test signals were either constant (CA), sinusoidally modulated (SAM), or randomly modulated (RAM). Results for hearing-impaired listeners showed larger frequency difference limens (DLFM) than those for normally hearing listeners for all test frequencies (100 to 1000 Hz) and for all amplitude conditions. For both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects, the DFLM was smallest for the constant amplitude condition and largest for the randomly modulated condition. Differences in performance between the RAM and CA conditions were generally much larger for impaired listeners than for normally hearing listeners. With random amplitude modulation, DLFMs for the hearing-impaired subjects were approximately 36 times larger than those for normally hearing subjects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document