Effects of discrimination task difficulty on N1 and P2 components of late auditory evoked potential

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 456-461

  Cranford, Jerry L ^a,b   Rothermel, Amy K ^a   Walker, Letitia ^a   Stuart, Andrew ^a   Elangovan, Saravanan ^a  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory processing; Central; Discrimination task difficulty; Electrophysiology; Evoked responses; Late auditory evoked potential; Speech competition; Tonal frequency

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE; ADULT; ARTICLE; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIAL; COMPETITION; EAR; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; SPEECH;

ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE TESTS; ADULT; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; DOMINANCE, CEREBRAL; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; PITCH DISCRIMINATION;

EID: 16544376127     PISSN: 10500545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.15.6.6     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Alexander JE, Bauer LO, Kuperman S, Morzorati S, O'Connor SJ, Rohrbaugh J, Porjesz B, Begleiter H, Polich J. (1996) Hemispheric differences for P300 amplitude from an auditory oddball task. Int J Psychophysiol 21:189-196.
2. Cohen J. (1977) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic Press.
3. DeChicchis AR, Carpenter M, Cranford JL, Hymel M. (2002) Electrophysiologic correlates of attention versus distraction in young and elderly listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 13:383-391.
4. Fisher AL, Hymel ML, Cranford JL, DeChicchis AR. (2000) Electrophysiologic signs of auditory distraction in elderly listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 1:36-45.
5. Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ. (2001) Sources of age-related recognition difficulty for time-compressed speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res 44:709-719.
6. Helfer KS. (1992) Aging and the binaural advantage in reverberation and noise. J Speech Hear Res 35:1394-1440.
7. Helfer KS, Wilber LA. (1990) Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. J Speech Hear Res 33:149-155.
8. Humes LE, Christopherson L. (1991) Speech identification difficulties of hearing-impaired elderly persons: The contributions of auditory processing deficits. J Speech Hear Res 84:686-693.
9. Humes LE, Roberts L. (1990) Speech-recognition difficulties of the hearing-impaired elderly: The contributions of audibility. J Speech Hear Res 33:726-735.
10. Humes LE, Watson BU, Christensen LA, Cokely CG, Halling DC, Lee L. (1994) Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. J Speech Hear Res 37:465-474.
11. Hymel ML, Cranford J, Stuart A. (1998) Effects of contralateral speech competition on auditory event-related potentials recorded from elderly listeners: Brain map study. J Am Acad Audiol 9:385-397.
12. Keppel G. (1991) Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. Keren G, Lewis C. (1979) Partial omega squared for ANOVA designs. Educ Psychol Measures 39:119-128.
14. Knight RT, Hillyard SA, Woods DL, Neville HJ. (1980) The effects of frontal and temporal-parietal lesions on the auditory evoked potential in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 50:112-124.
15. Krumm M, Cranford JL. (1994) Effects of contralateral speech competition on the late auditory evoked response in children. J Am Acad Audiol 5:127-132.
16. Makela JP, Hari R. (1990) Long-latency auditory evoked magnetic fields. Adv Neurol 54:177-191.
17. Martin D, Cranford JL. (1991) Age-related changes in binaural processing. I. Evoked potential findings. Am J Otol 12:357-364
18. Reneau JP, Hnatiow GZ. (1975) Evoked Response Audiometry: A Topical and Historical Review. Baltimore: University Park Press.
19. Rif J, Hari R, Hamalainen MS, Sams M. (1991) Auditory attention affects two different areas in the human supratemporal cortex. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 79:464-472.
20. Roth WT, Ford JM, Lewis SJ, Kopell BS. (1976) Effects of stimulus probability and task ralevance on event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 13:311-317.
21. Semlitsch HV, Anderer R, Schuster P, Presslich O. (1986) A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology 23:695-703.
22. Squires KC, Hecox KE. (1983) Electrophysiological evaluation of higher level auditory processing. Semin Hear 4:415-433.
23. Strouse A, Ashmead DH, Ohde RN, Grantham DW. (1998) Temporal processing in the aging auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 104:2385-2399.
24. Tremblay KL, Kraus N. (2002) Auditory training induces asymmetrical changes in cortical neural activity. J Speech Lang Hear Res 45:564-572.
25. van Rooij JC, Plomp R. (1990) Auditory and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II: Multivariate analyses. J Acoust Soc Am 88:2611-2624.
26. van Rooij JC, Plomp R. (1992) Auditory and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. III. Additional data and final discussion. [letter to the editor] J Acoust Soc Am 91:1028-1030