Linearized response growth inferred from growth-of-masking slopes in ears with cochlear hearing loss.

Growth of masking for OFF-frequency conditions (probe frequency above the masker spectrum) and ON-frequency conditions (probe within the masker spectrum) was investigated using simultaneous masking in three subjects with normal hearing and nine subjects with high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Growth-of-masking functions (probe thresholds as a function of masker intensity) for OFF-frequency conditions were obtained for probe tones placed at six frequencies above a 200-Hz-wide masker with an upper edge at 520 Hz. Growth-of-masking functions for ON-frequency conditions were obtained for probe tones placed within the 200-Hz-wide masker and for probe tones placed within 400-Hz-wide maskers with upper edges at 1040, 1300, 1627, and 2040 Hz (probe tones placed 20 Hz below the upper edge frequency). Growth-of-masking functions were fit with a power function of masker intensity added to an internal noise with intensity equal to the absolute threshold for the probe, and were well described by two free parameters and a threshold constant: the growth-of-masking slope (beta), a masking sensitivity constant (kappa) that indicated the minimum effective masker level at which masking began, and the intensity of the probe at absolute threshold (IT). For OFF-frequency masking conditions, growth-of-masking slopes (beta) decreased by a factor of 0.8 for every 10 dB of hearing loss. Comparisons with data from previous studies of upward spread of masking, and assumptions about underlying physiological mechanisms, led to the conclusion that more gradual than normal growth-of-masking slopes reflect larger (steeper) growth-of-response slopes at the probe frequency in regions of hearing loss. Derived response-growth exponents increased by a factor of 1.2 for every 10 dB of hearing loss (HL), from an exponent around 0.25 at 0 dB HL to an exponent around 1.0 at 75 dB HL (linear response growth). Masking sensitivity constants (kappa), the minimum effective masker levels, indicated that masking began at slightly higher masker levels in subjects with sensorineural hearing loss than in subjects with normal hearing. It was concluded that higher masked thresholds in regions of hearing loss were due primarily to a loss of active gain at the probe frequency and were not due to an excessive response at the probe frequency to the lower-frequency masker. For ON-frequency masking conditions, growth-of-masking slopes were not different from normal in hearing-impaired subjects. ON-frequency masking began when the effective power within an auditory filter at the probe frequency reached elevated absolute threshold at the probe frequency. Critical ratios were normal except for one subject with the most hearing loss.

[1]  R V Harrison,et al.  Rate-versus-intensity functions and related AP responses in normal and pathological guinea pig and human cochleas. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  J R Dubno,et al.  Frequency selectivity and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners with equivalent masked thresholds. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Physiological mechanisms of psychophysical masking: observations from auditory-nerve fibers. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  R. Bilger,et al.  Pure‐Tone Octave Masking in Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 1972 .

[5]  M P Gorga,et al.  Suppression of auditory nerve responses. II. Suppression threshold and growth, iso-suppression contours. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Measuring the contribution of printed context information to acoustical word recognition by normal subjects. , 1985, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[7]  Brian R Glasberg,et al.  Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data , 1990, Hearing Research.

[8]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Peripheral origins of the upward spread of masking. , 1996 .

[9]  M. Charles Liberman,et al.  Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology. I. Threshold shift and characteristic-frequency shift , 1984, Hearing Research.

[10]  S Buus,et al.  Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Jean-Pierre Gagné Excess masking among listeners with high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss , 1983 .

[12]  M. Ruggero,et al.  Systemic Injection of Furosemide Alters the Mechanical Response to Sound of the Basilar Membrane , 1990 .

[13]  C. Turner,et al.  Spread of masking in normal subjects and in subjects with high-frequency hearing loss. , 1986, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[14]  P J Abbas,et al.  AP measurements of short-term adaptation in normal and in acoustically traumatized ears. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  D. A. Nelson,et al.  Release from upward spread of masking in regions of high-frequency hearing loss. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  B. Moore,et al.  Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  P J Abbas,et al.  Forward-masking AP tuning curves in normal and in acoustically traumatized ears. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  Growth of masking as a measure of response growth in hearing-impaired listeners. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  D A Nelson,et al.  Intensity discrimination in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  M. Sachs,et al.  Rate versus level functions for auditory-nerve fibers in cats: tone-burst stimuli. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  A J Klein,et al.  Upward spread of masking, hearing loss, and speech recognition in young and elderly listeners. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Growth of masking in sensorineural hearing loss. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[23]  M. Liberman,et al.  Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology. III. Stereocilia damage and alterations of threshold tuning curves , 1984, Hearing Research.

[24]  J R Dubno,et al.  Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  H Duifhuis,et al.  Masking and partial masking in listeners with a high-frequency hearing loss. , 1982, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[26]  S. Rice Mathematical analysis of random noise , 1944 .

[27]  B. M. Johnstone,et al.  Single auditory neuron response during acute acoustic trauma , 1980, Hearing Research.

[28]  J M Pickett,et al.  Sensorineural hearing loss and upward spread of masking. , 1970, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[29]  M F Dorman,et al.  Susceptibility to intraspeech spread of masking in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Mario A. Ruggero,et al.  The effects of acoustic trauma, other cochlear injury and death on basilar-membrane responses to sound , 1996 .

[31]  J R Dubno,et al.  Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  J J Zwislocki,et al.  Effects of hair cell lesions on responses of cochlear nerve fibers. I. Lesions, tuning curves, two-tone inhibition, and responses to trapezoidal-wave patterns. , 1980, Journal of neurophysiology.

[33]  S Buus,et al.  Frequency selectivity in normally-hearing and hearing-impaired observers. , 1980, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[34]  M. Ruggero,et al.  Furosemide alters organ of corti mechanics: evidence for feedback of outer hair cells upon the basilar membrane , 1991, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[35]  James Jerger,et al.  Masking by Octave Bands of Noise in Normal and Impaired Ears , 1960 .

[36]  R. L. Wegel,et al.  The Auditory Masking of One Pure Tone by Another and its Probable Relation to the Dynamics of the Inner Ear , 1924 .

[37]  B C Moore,et al.  Additivity of masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  Mario A. Ruggero,et al.  Alteration of basilar membrane responses to sound by acoustic overstimulation , 1993 .

[39]  D A Nelson,et al.  High-level psychophysical tuning curves: forward masking in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[40]  SPREAD OF MASKING IN EARS SHOWING ABNORMAL ADAPTATION AND CONDUCTIVE DEAFNESS. , 1965, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[41]  Ian M. Winter,et al.  Basilar membrane nonlinearity determines auditory nerve rate-intensity functions and cochlear dynamic range , 1990, Hearing Research.

[42]  R. A. Schmiedt,et al.  Effects of hair cell lesions on responses of cochlear nerve fibers. II. Single- and two-tone intensity functions in relation to tuning curves. , 1980, Journal of neurophysiology.

[43]  B C Moore,et al.  Factors affecting thresholds for sinusoidal signals in narrow-band maskers with fluctuating envelopes. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.