Effects of hearing aid amplification and stimulus intensity on cortical auditory evoked potentials

Audiology and Neurotology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 234-246

  Billings, Curtis J ^a   Tremblay, Kelly L ^a   Souza, Pamela E ^a   Binns, Malcolm A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b ROTMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cortical auditory evoked potentials; Event related potentials; Hearing aids; P1 N1 P2 complex; Stimulus intensity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; LATENT PERIOD; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SOUND DETECTION; SOUND INTENSITY; SOUND LEVEL MEASUREMENT; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AUDITORY CORTEX; EAR CANAL; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING AIDS; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 34249947180     PISSN: 14203030     EISSN: 14219700     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000101331     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Adler G, Adler J: Influence of stimulus intensity on AEP components in the 80- to 200-millisecond latency range. Audiology 1989;28:316-324.
2. Adler G, Adler J: Auditory stimulus processing at different stimulus intensities as reflected by auditory evoked potentials. Biol Psychiatry 1991;29:347-356.
3. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA): Guidelines for screening for hearing impairment and middle ear disorders. ASHA 1990;32(suppl 2):17-24.
4. Beagley HA, Knight JJ: Changes in auditory evoked response with intensity. J Laryngol Otol 1967;81:861-873.
5. Botte MC, Bujas Z, Chocholle R: Comparison between the growth of the averaged electroencephalic response and direct loudness estimations. J Acoust Soc Am 1975;58:208-213.
6. Bruneau N, Roux S, Garreau B, Lelord G: Frontal auditory evoked potentials and augmenting-reducing. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1985;62:364-371.
7. Burkard R, Hecox K: The effect of broadband noise on the human brainstem auditory evoked response. I. Rate and intensity effects. J Acoust Soc Am 1983;74:1204-1213.
8. Butler R, Keidel W, Spreng M: An investigation of the human cortical evoked potential under conditions of monaural and binaural stimulation. Acta Otol 1969;68:317-326.
9. Caldwell M, Souza PE, Tremblay KL: Effect of probe tube insertion depth on spectral measures of speech. Trends Amplif 2006;10:145-154.
10. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, Erlbaum, 1988, pp 273-288, 355-356.
11. Costalupes JA, Young ED, Gibson DJ: Effects of continuous noise backgrounds on rate response of auditory nerve fibers in cat. J Neurophysiol 1984;51:1326-1344.
12. De Gennaro S, Braida LD, Durlach NI: Multi-channel syllabic compression for severely impaired listeners. J Rehabil Res Dev 1986;23:17-24.
13. Dillon H: Compression systems in hearing aids; in Dillon H (ed): Hearing Aids. New York, Thieme, 2001, pp 159-186.
14. Edwards B: Hearing aids and hearing impairment; in Greenberg S, Ainsworth AA, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds): Speech Processing in the Auditory System. New York, Springer, 2004, vol 18, pp 340-376.
15. Ellison JC, Harris FP, Muller T: Interactions of hearing aid compression release time and fitting formula: effects on speech acoustics. J Am Acad Audiol 2003;14:59-71.
16. Gatehouse S, Robinson K: Acclimatisation to monaural hearing aid fitting - effects on loudness functions and preliminary evidence for parallel electrophysiological and behavioural effects; in Kollmeier B (ed): Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids. Hackensack, World Scientific, 1996.
17. Gibson DJ, Young ED, Costalupes JA: Similarity of dynamic range adjustment in auditory nerve and cochlear nuclei. J Neurophysiol 1985;53:940-958.
18. Gravel J, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR, Vaughan HG, Wallace IF: Case studies. Semin Hear 1989;10:272-287.
19. Greenhouse WW, Geisser S: On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959;24:95-112.
20. Guo Y, Burkard R: The masking level difference in chinchilla auditory cortex: effects of inner hair cell loss. Hear Res 2003;178:12-26.
21. Hedrick MS, Rice T: Effect of a single-channel wide dynamic range compression circuit on perception of stop consonant place of articulation. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000;43:1174-1184.
22. Hickson L, Byrne D: Acoustic analysis of speech through a hearing aid: effects of linear vs. compression amplification. Aust J Audiol 1995;17:1-13.
23. Hickson L, Thyer N, Bates D: Acoustic analysis of speech through a hearing aid: consonant-vowel ratio effects with two-channel compression amplification. J Am Acad Audiol 1999;10:549-556.
24. Jenstad LM, Souza PE: Quantifying the effect of compression hearing aid release time on speech acoustics and intelligibility. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2005;48:651-667.
25. Kaplan-Neeman R, Kishon-Rabin L, Henkin Y, Muchnik C: Identification of syllables in noise: electrophysiological and behavioral correlates. J Acoust Soc Am 2006;120:926-933.
26. Khechinashvili SN, Kevanishvili ZS, Kajaia OA: Amplitude and latency studies of the averaged auditory evoked responses to tones of different intensities. Acta Otolaryngol 1973;76:395-401.
27. Kirk RE: Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences, ed 1. Belmont, Brooks/Cole, 1968.
28. Korczak PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR: Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing aids on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear 2005;26:165-185.
29. Kraus N, McGee TJ: Mismatch negativity in the assessment of central auditory function. Am J Audiol 1994;3:39-51.
30. Kuk F: Consideration in modern multichannel nonlinear hearing aids; in Valente M (ed): Hearing Aids: Standards, Options and Limitations, ed 2. New York, Thieme, 2002, pp 178-213.
31. Kurtzberg D: Cortical event-related potentials assessment of auditory system function. Semin Hear 1989;10:252-261.
32. Martin BA, Boothroyd A: Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to changes of spectrum and amplitude. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:2155-2161.
33. McCandless GA, Best L: Summed evoked responses using pure-tone stimuli. J Speech Hear Res 1966;9:266-272.
34. Moore A, Rose DE: Variability of latency and amplitude of acoustically evoked responses to pure tones of moderate to high intensity. Int Audiol 1969;8:171-181.
35. Naatanen R, Picton T: The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology 1987;24:375-425.
36. Phillips DP: Neural representation of sound amplitude in the auditory cortex: effects of noise masking. Behav Brain Res 1990;37:197-214.
37. Picton TW, Goodman W, Bryce D: Amplitude of evoked responses to tones of high intensity. Acta Otolaryngol 1970;70:77-82.
38. Picton TW, Woods DL, Baribeau-Braun J, Healey TM: Evoked potential audiometry. J Otolaryngol 1977;6:90-119.
39. Polich J, Aung M, Dalessio DJ: Long latency auditory evoked potentials: intensity, inter-stimulus interval, and habituation. Pavlov J Biol Sci 1988;23:35-40.
40. R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2006 (http://www.R.project.org).
41. Rapin I, Graziani LJ: Auditory-evoked responses in normal, brain-damaged, and deaf infants. Neurology 1967;17:881-894.
42. Rapin I, Schimmel H, Tourk LM, Krasnegor NA, Pollak C: Evoked responses to clicks and tones of varying intensity in waking adults. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1966;21:335-344.
43. Rees A, Palmer AR: Rate-intensity functions and their modification by broadband noise for neurons in the guinea pig inferior colliculus. J Acoust Soc Am 1988;83:1488-1498.
44. Roth WT, Dorato KH, Kopell BS: Intensity and task effects on evoked physiological responses to noise bursts. Psychophysiology 1984;21:466-481.
45. Sharma A, Tobey E, Dorman M, Bharadwaj S, Martin K, Gilley P, Kunkel F: Central auditory maturation and babbling development in infants with cochlear implants. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:511-516.
46. Skrandies W: Data reduction of multichannel fields: global field power and principal component analysis. Brain Topogr 1989;2:73-80.
47. Souza PE: Effects of compression on speech acoustics, intelligibility, and sound quality. Trends Amplif 2002;6:131-165.
48. Souza PE, Tremblay KL: New perspectives on assessing amplification effects. Trends Amplif 2006;10:119-144.
49. Spoor A, Timmer F, Odenthal DW: The evoked auditory response (EAR) to intensity modulated and frequency modulated tones and tone bursts. Int Audiol 1969;8:410-415.
50. Stelmachowicz PG, Kopun J, Mace A, Lewis DE, Nittrouer S: The perception of amplified speech by listeners with hearing loss: acoustic correlates. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;98:1388-1399.
51. Tremblay KL, Billings CJ, Friesen LM, Souza PE: Neural representation of amplified speech sounds. Ear Hear 2006a;27:93-103.
52. Tremblay KL, Kalstein L, Billings CJ, Souza PE: The neural representation of consonant-vowel transitions in adults who wear hearing aids. Trends Amplif 2006b;10:155-162.
53. Uziel A, Seneclause S: Electrophysiological investigation of auditory recruitment by averaged electroencephalographic-evoked response. Audiology 1978;17:141-151.
54. Whiting KA, Martin BA, Stapells DR: The effects of broadband noise masking on cortical event-related potentials to speech sounds /ba/ and /da/. Ear Hear 1998;19:218-231.