Methods to eliminate stimulus transduction artifact from insert earphones during electroencephalography

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 144-150

  Campbell, Tom ^a   Kerlin, Jess R ^a   Bishop, Christopher W ^a   Miller, Lee M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROOCULOGRAPHY; EVOKED BRAIN STEM AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING DISORDER; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; TRANSDUCER; VALIDATION STUDY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTIFACTS; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROOCULOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY, BRAIN STEM; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING DISORDERS; HUMANS; MALE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TRANSDUCERS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84855249107     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182280353     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Aiken, S. J., & Picton, T. W. (2008). Envelope and spectral frequencyfollowing responses to vowel sounds. Hear Res, 245, 35-47.
2. Akhoun, I., Moulin, A., Jeanvoine, A., et al. (2008). Speech auditory brainstem response (speech ABR) characteristics depending on recording conditions, and hearing status: An experimental parametric study. J Neurosci Methods, 175, 196-205.
3. Alcaini, M., Giard, M. H., Thevenet, M., & Pernier, J. (1994). 2 separate frontal components in the N1 wave of the human auditory-evoked response. Psychophysiol, 31, 611-615. (Pubitemid 24370122)
4. American National Standards Institute (ANSI). (1992). American National Standard for Manual Audiometry. ANSI S3.21-1978 (R-1992). New York, NY: ANSI.
5. ANSI S3.21-1978. (1992). American National Standard for Manual Audiometry. New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
6. Banai, K., & Kraus, N. (2006). Neurobiology of (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder and Language-Based Learning Disability. In G. D. Chermak & F. E. Musiek (Eds). Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder: Volume I: Auditory Neuroscience and Diagnosis (pp. 89-116). San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing Inc.
7. Banai, K., & Kraus, N. (2008). The Dynamic Brainstem: Implications for APD. In D. McFarland & A. Cacace (Eds). Current Controversies in Central Auditory Processing Disorder (pp. 269-289). San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing Inc.
8. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2010). Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer [Computer program]. Version 5.1.43. Retrieved August 4, 2010, from http://www.praat.org/.
9. Campbell, T., & Neuvonen, T. (2007). Adaptation of neuromagnetic N1 without shifts in dipolar orientation. Neuroreport, 18, 377-380. (Pubitemid 46667972)
10. Campbell, T., Winkler, I., Kujala, T., et al. (2003). The N1 hypothesis and irrelevant sound: Evidence from token set effects. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res, 18, 39-47. (Pubitemid 37500973)
11. Campbell, T., Winkler, I., Kujala, T. (2005). Disruption of immediate memory and brain processes: An auditory ERP protocol. Brain Res Brain Res Protoc, 14, 77-86. (Pubitemid 40249948)
12. Campbell, T., Winkler, I., Kujala, T. (2007). N1 and the mismatch negativity are spatiotemporally distinct ERP components: Disruption of immediate memory by auditory distraction can be related to N1. Psychophysiology, 44, 530-540. (Pubitemid 46905326)
13. Cox, R. M., & Alexander, G. C. (1995). The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear, 16, 176-186.
14. Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods, 134, 9-21. (Pubitemid 38224183)
15. Firszt, J., Chambers, R., Kraus, N., et al. (2002). Neurophysiology of cochlear implant users I: Effects of stimulus current level and electrode site on the electrical ABR, MLR and N1-P2 response. Ear Hear, 23, 502-515. (Pubitemid 35448633)
16. Fisch, B. J., & Spehlmann, R. (1999). EEG Primer: Basic Principles of Digital and Analog EEG. New York, NY: Elsevier.
17. Golding, M., Carter, N., Mitchell, P., et al. (2004). Prevalence of central auditory processing (CAP) abnormality in an older Australian population: The Blue Mountains Hearing Study. J Am Acad Audiol, 15, 633-642.
18. Hall, J. W. (2006). New Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses. Boston, MA: Pearson.
19. Henry, J. A., Flick, C. L., Gilbert, A., et al. (2001). Reliability of hearing thresholds: Computer-automated testing with ER-4B Canal Phone earphones. J Rehabil Res Dev, 38, 567-581. (Pubitemid 34130125)
20. Killion, M. C. (1984). New insert headphones for audiometry. Hear Instrum, 35, 46.
21. Kinsler, L. E., Frey, A. R., Coppens, A. B., et al. (1982). Fundamentals of Acoustics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Moore, B. C. J. (2003). An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing (5th ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald, Academic Press.
23. Näätänen, R., & Winkler, I. (1999). The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. Psychol Bull, 125, 826-859.
24. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., & Singh, G. (2006). Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: Implications for hearing aid fitting and audiologic rehabilitation. Trends Amplif, 10, 29-59. (Pubitemid 44257141)
25. Picton, T. W., Stapells, D. R., Campbell, K. B. (1981). Auditory evoked potentials from the human cochlea and brainstem. J Otolaryngol, 10, 1-41.
26. Riazi, M., & Ferraro, J. A. (2008). Observations on mastoid versus ear canal recorded cochlear microphonic in newborns and adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 19, 46-55. (Pubitemid 351836185)
27. Schoonhoven, R. (1992). Dependence of auditory brain-stem response on click polarity and high-frequency sensorineural hearing-loss. Audiology, 31, 72-86.
28. Shinn-Cunningham, B., & Best, V. (2008). Selective attention in normal and impaired hearing. Trends Amplif, 12, 283-299.
29. Skoe, E., & Kraus, N. (2010). Auditory brain stem response to complex sounds: A tutorial. Ear Hear, 31, 302-324.
30. Starr, A., & Brackmann, D. E. (1979). Brainstem potentials evoked by electrical stimulation of the cochlea in human subjects. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 88(4 Pt 1), 550-556. (Pubitemid 9255214)
31. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Nishi, K., Choi, S., et al. (2008). Effects of stimulus bandwidth on the imitation of English fricatives by normal hearing children. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 51, 1369-1380.
32. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., et al. (2001). The effect of stimulus bandwidth on the perception of /s/ in normal and hearing-impaired children and adults. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 2183-2190. (Pubitemid 32959716)
33. Swartz, B. E. (1998). The advantages of digital over analog recording techniques. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 106, 113-117. (Pubitemid 28133390)
34. Waring, M. D., Ponton, C. W., Don, M. (1999). Activating separate ascending auditory pathways produces different human thalamic/cortical responses. Hear Res, 130, 219-229. (Pubitemid 29172595)
35. Woldorff, M. (1993). Distortion of ERP averages due to overlap from temporally adjacent ERPs: Analysis and correction. Psychophysiol, 30, 98-119. (Pubitemid 23027781)
36. Woldorff, M., Hansen, J. C., Hillyard, S. A. (1987). Evidence for effects of selective attention in the mid-latency range of the human auditory event-related potential. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl, 40, 146-154.
37. Woldorff, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1991). Modulation of early auditory processing during selective listening to rapidly presented tones. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 79, 170-191.
38. Woods, D. L., & Yund, E. W. (2007). Perceptual training of phoneme identification for hearing loss. Semin Hear, 28, 110-119. (Pubitemid 46685292)
39. Yueh, B., Shapiro, N., MacLean, C. H., et al. (2003). Screening and management of adult hearing loss in primary care: Scientific review. JAMA, 289, 1976-1985. (Pubitemid 37430230)