scholarly journals Sensitivity to a Break in Interaural Correlation in Frequency-Gliding Noises

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Langchen Fan ◽  
Lingzhi Kong ◽  
Liang Li ◽  
Tianshu Qu
Keyword(s):  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Center Frequency ◽  
Constant Frequency ◽  
Interaural Correlation ◽  
Duration Threshold ◽  
Arbitrary Noise ◽  
Noise Experiment

This study was to investigate whether human listeners are able to detect a binaurally uncorrelated arbitrary-noise fragment embedded in binaurally identical arbitrary-noise markers [a break in correlation, break in interaural correlation (BIAC)] in either frequency-constant (frequency-steady) or frequency-varied (unidirectionally frequency gliding) noise. Ten participants with normal hearing were tested in Experiment 1 for up-gliding, down-gliding, and frequency-steady noises. Twenty-one participants with normal hearing were tested in Experiment 2a for both up-gliding and frequency-steady noises. Another nineteen participants with normal hearing were tested in Experiment 2b for both down-gliding and frequency-steady noises. Listeners were able to detect a BIAC in the frequency-steady noise (center frequency = 400 Hz) and two types of frequency-gliding noises (center frequency: between 100 and 1,600 Hz). The duration threshold for detecting the BIAC in frequency-gliding noises was significantly longer than that in the frequency-steady noise (Experiment 1), and the longest interaural delay at which a duration-fixed BIAC (200 ms) in frequency-gliding noises could be detected was significantly shorter than that in the frequency-steady noise (Experiment 2). Although human listeners can detect a BIAC in frequency-gliding noises, their sensitivity to a BIAC in frequency-gliding noises is much lower than that in frequency-steady noise.

scholarly journals Facilitatory and Inhibitory Frequency Tuning of Combination-Sensitive Neurons in the Primary Auditory Cortex of Mustached Bats

1999 ◽  
Vol 82 (5) ◽  
pp. 2327-2345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jagmeet S. Kanwal ◽  
Douglas C. Fitzpatrick ◽  
Nobuo Suga
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Cortex ◽  
Frequency Tuning ◽  
Temporal Structure ◽  
Primary Auditory Cortex ◽  
Frequency Discrimination ◽  
Inhibitory Response ◽  
Center Frequency ◽  
Constant Frequency ◽  
Single Tone ◽  
Threshold Response

Mustached bats, Pteronotus parnellii parnellii,emit echolocation pulses that consist of four harmonics with a fundamental consisting of a constant frequency (CF1-4) component followed by a short, frequency-modulated (FM1-4) component. During flight, the pulse fundamental frequency is systematically lowered by an amount proportional to the velocity of the bat relative to the background so that the Doppler-shifted echo CF2 is maintained within a narrowband centered at ∼61 kHz. In the primary auditory cortex, there is an expanded representation of 60.6- to 63.0-kHz frequencies in the “Doppler-shifted CF processing” (DSCF) area where neurons show sharp, level-tolerant frequency tuning. More than 80% of DSCF neurons are facilitated by specific frequency combinations of ∼25 kHz (BFlow) and ∼61 kHz (BFhigh). To examine the role of these neurons for fine frequency discrimination during echolocation, we measured the basic response parameters for facilitation to synthesized echolocation signals varied in frequency, intensity, and in their temporal structure. Excitatory response areas were determined by presenting single CF tones, facilitative curves were obtained by presenting paired CF tones. All neurons showing facilitation exhibit at least two facilitative response areas, one of broad spectral tuning to frequencies centered at BFlowcorresponding to a frequency in the lower half of the echolocation pulse FM1 sweep and another of sharp tuning to frequencies centered at BFhigh corresponding to the CF2 in the echo. Facilitative response areas for BFhigh are broadened by ∼0.38 kHz at both the best amplitude and 50 dB above threshold response and show lower thresholds compared with the single-tone excitatory BFhigh response areas. An increase in the sensitivity of DSCF neurons would lead to target detection from farther away and/or for smaller targets than previously estimated on the basis of single-tone responses to BFhigh. About 15% of DSCF neurons show oblique excitatory and facilitatory response areas at BFhigh so that the center frequency of the frequency-response function at any amplitude decreases with increasing stimulus amplitudes. DSCF neurons also have inhibitory response areas that either skirt or overlap both the excitatory and facilitatory response areas for BFhigh and sometimes for BFlow. Inhibition by a broad range of frequencies contributes to the observed sharpness of frequency tuning in these neurons. Recordings from orthogonal penetrations show that the best frequencies for facilitation as well as excitation do not change within a cortical column. There does not appear to be any systematic representation of facilitation ratios across the cortical surface of the DSCF area.

scholarly journals Pure tone discrimination with cochlear implants and filter-band spread

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luise Wagner ◽  
Reyhan Altindal ◽  
Stefan K. Plontke ◽  
Torsten Rahne
Keyword(s):  
Pure Tone ◽  
Difference Limen ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Corner Frequency ◽  
Center Frequency ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Tone Frequency ◽  
Frequency Bands ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Tone Discrimination

AbstractFor many cochlear implant (CI) users, frequency discrimination is still challenging. We studied the effect of frequency differences relative to the electrode frequency bands on pure tone discrimination. A single-center, prospective, controlled, psychoacoustic exploratory study was conducted in a tertiary university referral center. Thirty-four patients with Cochlear Ltd. and MED-EL CIs and 19 age-matched normal-hearing control subjects were included. Two sinusoidal tones were presented with varying frequency differences. The reference tone frequency was chosen according to the center frequency of basal or apical electrodes. Discrimination abilities were psychophysically measured in a three-interval, two-alternative, forced-choice procedure (3I-2AFC) for various CI electrodes. Hit rates were measured, particularly with respect to discrimination abilities at the corner frequency of the electrode frequency-bands. The mean rate of correct decision concerning pitch difference was about 60% for CI users and about 90% for the normal-hearing control group. In CI users, the difference limen was two semitones, while normal-hearing participants detected the difference of one semitone. No influence of the corner frequency of the CI electrodes was found. In CI users, pure tone discrimination seems to be independent of tone positions relative to the corner frequency of the electrode frequency-band. Differences of 2 semitones can be distinguished within one electrode.

scholarly journals Auditory midbrain representation of a break in interaural correlation

2015 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 2258-2264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Wang ◽  
Liang Li
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Phase Locking ◽  
Center Frequency ◽  
Auditory Midbrain ◽  
Linear Summation ◽  
Temporary Reduction ◽  
Interaural Correlation ◽  
Neuron Populations ◽  
Fine Structures ◽  
Sustained Responses

The auditory peripheral system filters broadband sounds into narrowband waves and decomposes narrowband waves into quickly varying temporal fine structures (TFSs) and slowly varying envelopes. When a noise is presented binaurally (with the interaural correlation being 1), human listeners can detect a transient break in interaural correlation (BIC), which does not alter monaural inputs substantially. The central correlates of BIC are unknown. This study examined whether phase locking-based frequency-following responses (FFRs) of neuron populations in the rat auditory midbrain [inferior colliculus (IC)] to interaurally correlated steady-state narrowband noises are modulated by introduction of a BIC. The results showed that the noise-induced FFR exhibited both a TFS component (FFRTFS) and an envelope component (FFREnv), signaling the center frequency and bandwidth, respectively. Introduction of either a BIC or an interaurally correlated amplitude gap (which had the summated amplitude matched to the BIC) significantly reduced both FFRTFS and FFREnv. However, the BIC-induced FFRTFS reduction and FFREnv reduction were not correlated with the amplitude gap-induced FFRTFS reduction and FFREnv reduction, respectively. Thus, although introduction of a BIC does not affect monaural inputs, it causes a temporary reduction in sustained responses of IC neuron populations to the noise. This BIC-induced FFR reduction is not based on a simple linear summation of noise signals.

A Questionnaire Survey of Current Rehabilitation Practices for Adults With Normal Hearing Sensitivity Who Experience Auditory Difficulties

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 738-761
Author(s):  
Tess K. Koerner ◽  
Melissa A. Papesh ◽  
Frederick J. Gallun
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Questionnaire Survey ◽  
Patient Population ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Training Methods ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Considerable Benefit ◽  
High Level

Purpose A questionnaire survey was conducted to collect information from clinical audiologists about rehabilitation options for adult patients who report significant auditory difficulties despite having normal or near-normal hearing sensitivity. This work aimed to provide more information about what audiologists are currently doing in the clinic to manage auditory difficulties in this patient population and their views on the efficacy of recommended rehabilitation methods. Method A questionnaire survey containing multiple-choice and open-ended questions was developed and disseminated online. Invitations to participate were delivered via e-mail listservs and through business cards provided at annual audiology conferences. All responses were anonymous at the time of data collection. Results Responses were collected from 209 participants. The majority of participants reported seeing at least one normal-hearing patient per month who reported significant communication difficulties. However, few respondents indicated that their location had specific protocols for the treatment of these patients. Counseling was reported as the most frequent rehabilitation method, but results revealed that audiologists across various work settings are also successfully starting to fit patients with mild-gain hearing aids. Responses indicated that patient compliance with computer-based auditory training methods was regarded as low, with patients generally preferring device-based rehabilitation options. Conclusions Results from this questionnaire survey strongly suggest that audiologists frequently see normal-hearing patients who report auditory difficulties, but that few clinicians are equipped with established protocols for diagnosis and management. While many feel that mild-gain hearing aids provide considerable benefit for these patients, very little research has been conducted to date to support the use of hearing aids or other rehabilitation options for this unique patient population. This study reveals the critical need for additional research to establish evidence-based practice guidelines that will empower clinicians to provide a high level of clinical care and effective rehabilitation strategies to these patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document