Correspondence between behavioral and individually "optimized" otoacoustic emission estimates of human cochlear input/output curves.

Previous studies have shown a high within-subject correspondence between distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) input/output (I/O) curves and behaviorally inferred basilar membrane (BM) I/O curves for frequencies above approximately 2 kHz. For lower frequencies, DPOAE I/O curves contained notches and plateaus that did not have a counterpart in corresponding behavioral curves. It was hypothesized that this might improve by using individualized optimal DPOAE primary levels. Here, data from previous studies are re-analyzed to test this hypothesis by comparing behaviorally inferred BM I/O curves and DPOAE I/O curves measured with well-established group-average primary levels and two individualized primary level rules: one optimized to maximize DPOAE levels and one intended for primaries to evoke comparable BM responses at the f(2) cochlear region. Test frequencies were 0.5, 1, and 4 kHz. Behavioral I/O curves were obtained from temporal (forward) masking curves. Results showed high within-subject correspondence between behavioral and DPOAE I/O curves at 4 kHz only, regardless of the primary level rule. Plateaus and notches were equally common in low-frequency DPOAE I/O curves for individualized and group-average DPOAE primary levels at 0.5 and 1 kHz. Results are discussed in terms of the adequacy of DPOAE I/O curves for inferring individual cochlear nonlinearity characteristics.

[1]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Basilar-membrane nonlinearity estimated by pulsation threshold. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Vit Drga,et al.  Psychophysical evidence for auditory compression at low characteristic frequencies. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  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.

[4]  Tiffany A. Johnson,et al.  Distortion-product otoacoustic emission measured with continuously varying stimulus level. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  S. Neely,et al.  Reducing reflected contributions to ear-canal distortion product otoacoustic emissions in humans. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Ray Meddis,et al.  Cochlear nonlinearity between 500 and 8000 Hz in listeners with normal hearing. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Psychophysical Manifestations of Compression: Hearing-Impaired Listeners , 2004 .

[8]  D A Nelson,et al.  A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  Estimation of the degree of inner and outer hair cell dysfunction from distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions , 2009 .

[10]  Tiffany A. Johnson,et al.  Influence of primary-level and primary-frequency ratios on human distortion product otoacoustic emissions. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  Otoacoustic Emissions Theories Can Be Tested with Behavioral Methods , 2010 .

[12]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Cochlear Compression: Perceptual Measures and Implications for Normal and Impaired Hearing , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[13]  L. Robles,et al.  Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. , 2001, Physiological reviews.

[14]  Thomas Janssen,et al.  Otoacoustic Emissions as a Diagnostic Tool in a Clinical Context , 2008 .

[15]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  A variant temporal-masking-curve method for inferring peripheral auditory compression. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  R. A. Schmiedt,et al.  Fine structure of the 2f1-f2 acoustic distortion product: changes with primary level. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  A. Oxenham,et al.  A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Thomas Janssen,et al.  Optimal L 1−L 2 primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans , 2000, Hearing Research.

[19]  R. Kalluri,et al.  Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Vit Drga,et al.  Inferred basilar-membrane response functions for listeners with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  B. Moore,et al.  Temporal masking curves for hearing-impaired listeners , 2006, Hearing Research.

[22]  I. Russell,et al.  A descriptive model of the receptor potential nonlinearities generated by the hair cell mechanoelectrical transducer. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Pitfalls in behavioral estimates of basilar-membrane compression in humans. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  A computational algorithm for computing nonlinear auditory frequency selectivity. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  T. Janssen,et al.  The level and growth behavior of the 2 f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission and its relationship to auditory sensitivity in normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  S. P. Bacon,et al.  Compression estimates using behavioral and otoacoustic emission measures , 2005, Hearing Research.

[27]  Tiffany A Johnson,et al.  Distortion-product otoacoustic emission input/output characteristics in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  A. M. Brown,et al.  The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1-f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  S. Dhar,et al.  Effects of a Suppressor Tone on Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions Fine Structure: Why a Universal Suppressor Level Is Not a Practical Solution to Obtaining Single-Generator DP-Grams , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[30]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent , 2009, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[31]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Psychophysical Manifestations of Compression: Normal-Hearing Listeners , 2004 .

[32]  R. A. Schmiedt,et al.  Fine structure of the 2 f1-f2 acoustic distortion products: effects of primary level and frequency ratios. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Evidence for the distortion product frequency place as a source of distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) fine structure in humans. I. Fine structure and higher-order DPOAE as a function of the frequency ratio f2/f1. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  Tiffany A. Johnson,et al.  Distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) input/output functions and the influence of the second DPOAE source. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  E. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  Cochlear nonlinearity in normal-hearing subjects as inferred psychophysically and from distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Ray Meddis,et al.  Cochlear compression in listeners with moderate sensorineural hearing loss , 2005, Hearing Research.

[38]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  Thomas Janssen,et al.  Similarity in loudness and distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions: implications for an objective hearing aid adjustment. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Andrew J Oxenham,et al.  Comparing different estimates of cochlear compression in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  G. K. Martin,et al.  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a nonhuman primate. II. Cochlear anatomy , 1988, Hearing Research.