Magnitudes and phases of human distortion-product otoacoustic emissions at 2f 1−f 2 against f 2/f 1: effects of an audiometric notch

The influence of the frequency ratio f(2)/f(1) of two pure-tone stimuli on the distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) at 2f(1)-f(2) was assessed in 14 hearing-impaired human ears exhibiting a narrow audiometric notch at 4 kHz, whereas 11 normally hearing ears served as controls. A fixed-f(2) paradigm was used, with f(2) values varying from 2 to 8 kHz in 1-kHz steps. The intensities of the two stimuli were either 60 or 70 dB SPL. The magnitudes and phases of DPOAEs were extracted so that the bandpass filter-like profile of DPOAE magnitude against f(2)/f(1) (f(2)/f(1) magnitude function) could be characterized by the presence and position of its maximum, and DPOAE group delays were derived from the phase gradient of the DPOAE when f(1) varied. The main difference between normal and impaired ears occurred at 4 kHz in that, in contrast with normal ears, nine impaired ears out of 14 did not present any peak in their f(2)/f(1) magnitude function, while the remaining five ears only differed from normal ones by a slightly shifted maximum toward larger f(2)/f(1)s. Group delays were significantly shortened in all impaired ears, with a tendency to be shorter in the subset of ears with flat DPOAE magnitude profiles with f(2)/f(1). No clear effect of notch depth was observed, and with the chosen stimulus characteristics, no abnormal DPOAE result was observed whenever f(2) fell outside the audiometric notch. It is concluded that DPOAE group delays apparently provide useful objective clues of cochlear dysfunction, more sensitive than DPOAE magnitudes inasmuch as many of them remained near the normal range. Although a majority of f(2)/f(1) magnitude functions were clearly flattened when f(2) was impaired, this feature was less systematic.

[1]  D T Kemp,et al.  Multicomponent acoustic distortion product otoacoustic emission phase in humans. II. Implications for distortion product otoacoustic emissions generation. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  A. M. Brown,et al.  The effect of aspirin on cochlear mechanical tuning. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  B L Lonsbury-Martin,et al.  Visualization of the onset of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, and measurement of their latency. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  G. K. Martin,et al.  Acoustic distortion products in rabbit ear canal. II. Sites of origin revealed by suppression contours and pure-tone exposures , 1987, Hearing Research.

[5]  G. K. Yates,et al.  Outer hair cell receptor current and sensorineural hearing loss , 1989, Hearing Research.

[6]  J. Eggermont,et al.  Estimating cochlear filter response properties from distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) phase delay measurements in normal hearing human adults , 1998, Hearing Research.

[7]  R. Patuzzi A four-state kinetic model of the temporary threshold shift after loud sound based on inactivation of hair cell transduction channels , 1998, Hearing Research.

[8]  J J Eggermont,et al.  Measuring human cochlear traveling wave delay using distortion product emission phase responses. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  S Dhar,et al.  Experimental confirmation of the two-source interference model for the fine structure of distortion product otoacoustic emissions. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  B L Lonsbury-Martin,et al.  Acoustic distortion products in humans: systematic changes in amplitudes as a function of f2/f1 ratio. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  R. Probst,et al.  Suppression of the 2f 1−f 2 otoacoustic emission in humans , 1992, Hearing Research.

[12]  P Avan,et al.  Direct evidence of cubic difference tone propagation by intracochlear acoustic pressure measurements in the guinea‐pig , 1998, The European journal of neuroscience.

[13]  L. Kanis,et al.  Frequency dependence of acoustic distortion products in a locally active model of the cochlea. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  R Probst,et al.  A review of otoacoustic emissions. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  M. J. McCoy,et al.  Dependence of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions on primary levels in normal and impaired ears. II. Asymmetry in L1,L2 space. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  William E. Brownell,et al.  Outer Hair Cell Electromotility and Otoacoustic Emissions , 1990, Ear and hearing.

[17]  C. Talmadge,et al.  Interrelations among distortion-product phase-gradient delays: their connection to scaling symmetry and its breaking. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  J. Allen,et al.  A second cochlear-frequency map that correlates distortion product and neural tuning measurements. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  D O Kim,et al.  Cochlear mechanics: nonlinear behavior in two-tone responses as reflected in cochlear-nerve-fiber responses and in ear-canal sound pressure. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  D. Kemp,et al.  Distortion product otoacoustic emission delay measurement in human ears. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  S. Neely,et al.  Cochlear generation of intermodulation distortion revealed by DPOAE frequency functions in normal and impaired ears. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  C. Abdala Distortion product otoacoustic emission (2f1-f2) amplitude as a function of f2/f1 frequency ratio and primary tone level separation in human adults and neonates. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  I. Russell,et al.  Origin of the bell-like dependence of the DPOAE amplitude on primary frequency ratio. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  D. Kemp Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  J. Guinan,et al.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  A. M. Brown,et al.  Mechanical filtering of sound in the inner ear , 1992, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[27]  J. Aran,et al.  CD1 hearing-impaired mice. II: Group latencies and optimal f2/f1 ratios of distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and scanning electron microscopy , 1998, Hearing Research.