Using individual differences to assess modulation-processing mechanisms and age effects

Publication date: Available online 1 November 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Nihaad Paraouty, Christian Lorenzi
This study used a correlational approach to clarify the mechanisms involved in modulation coding. Amplitude-modulation (AM) and frequency-modulation (FM) detection thresholds (AMDTs and FMDTs, respectively) were assessed for 70 normal-hearing listeners. In order to increase between-listeners variability in peripheral coding, participants with a wide range of age (20-70 years) were included. AMDTs and FMDTs were measured at a 5-Hz rate, using a 500-Hz sinusoidal carrier. FMDTs were also measured in the presence of an interfering AM to discourage the use of temporal-envelope cues. The results showed that AMDTs were significantly correlated with FMDTs, but not with FMDTs measured with interfering AM. FMDTs with and without interfering AM were significantly correlated with each other. This pattern of correlation proved to be robust, providing additional evidence that for low carrier frequencies, (i) low-rate AM and FM detection is based on a common code using temporal-envelope cues and (ii) low-rate FM detection is based on an additional code using cues distinct from temporal-envelope. The analyses also showed that age was correlated with FMDTs only. However, no significant difference was found when comparing the various correlations with age. Hence, the effects of age on modulation sensitivity remain unclear.



from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2ebvApr
via IFTTT

Spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing in unilateral cochlear implant users

Publication date: Available online 31 October 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Francesco Pavani, Marta Venturini, Francesca Baruffaldi, Luca Artesini, Francesca Bonfioli, Giuseppe Nicolò Frau, Wieske van Zoest
In the present study we examined the integrity of spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing (MSC) mechanisms in unilateral CI users. We tested 17 unilateral CI users and 17 age-matched normal hearing (NH) controls in an elevation-discrimination task for visual targets delivered at peripheral locations. Visual targets were presented alone (visual-only condition) or together with abrupt sounds that matched or did not match the location of the visual targets (audio-visual conditions). All participants were also tested in simple pointing to free-field sounds task, to obtain a basic measure of their spatial hearing ability in the naturalistic environment in which the experiment was conducted. Hearing controls were tested both in binaural and monaural conditions. NH controls showed spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination for visual targets that matched sound cues) both in the binaural and in the monaural hearing conditions. In addition, they showed non-spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination responses in audio-visual conditions compared to visual-only conditions, regardless of sound cue location) in the monaural condition. Monaural CI users showed no spatial MSC benefits, but retained non-spatial MSC benefits comparable to that observed in NH controls tested monaurally. The absence of spatial MSC in CI users likely reflects the poor spatial hearing ability measured in these participants. These findings reveal the importance of studying the impact of CI re-afferentation beyond auditory processing alone, addressing in particular the fundamental mechanisms that serves orienting of multisensory attention in the environment.



from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2fCgLS3
via IFTTT

Using individual differences to assess modulation-processing mechanisms and age effects

Publication date: Available online 1 November 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Nihaad Paraouty, Christian Lorenzi
This study used a correlational approach to clarify the mechanisms involved in modulation coding. Amplitude-modulation (AM) and frequency-modulation (FM) detection thresholds (AMDTs and FMDTs, respectively) were assessed for 70 normal-hearing listeners. In order to increase between-listeners variability in peripheral coding, participants with a wide range of age (20-70 years) were included. AMDTs and FMDTs were measured at a 5-Hz rate, using a 500-Hz sinusoidal carrier. FMDTs were also measured in the presence of an interfering AM to discourage the use of temporal-envelope cues. The results showed that AMDTs were significantly correlated with FMDTs, but not with FMDTs measured with interfering AM. FMDTs with and without interfering AM were significantly correlated with each other. This pattern of correlation proved to be robust, providing additional evidence that for low carrier frequencies, (i) low-rate AM and FM detection is based on a common code using temporal-envelope cues and (ii) low-rate FM detection is based on an additional code using cues distinct from temporal-envelope. The analyses also showed that age was correlated with FMDTs only. However, no significant difference was found when comparing the various correlations with age. Hence, the effects of age on modulation sensitivity remain unclear.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2ebvApr
via IFTTT

Spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing in unilateral cochlear implant users

Publication date: Available online 31 October 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Francesco Pavani, Marta Venturini, Francesca Baruffaldi, Luca Artesini, Francesca Bonfioli, Giuseppe Nicolò Frau, Wieske van Zoest
In the present study we examined the integrity of spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing (MSC) mechanisms in unilateral CI users. We tested 17 unilateral CI users and 17 age-matched normal hearing (NH) controls in an elevation-discrimination task for visual targets delivered at peripheral locations. Visual targets were presented alone (visual-only condition) or together with abrupt sounds that matched or did not match the location of the visual targets (audio-visual conditions). All participants were also tested in simple pointing to free-field sounds task, to obtain a basic measure of their spatial hearing ability in the naturalistic environment in which the experiment was conducted. Hearing controls were tested both in binaural and monaural conditions. NH controls showed spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination for visual targets that matched sound cues) both in the binaural and in the monaural hearing conditions. In addition, they showed non-spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination responses in audio-visual conditions compared to visual-only conditions, regardless of sound cue location) in the monaural condition. Monaural CI users showed no spatial MSC benefits, but retained non-spatial MSC benefits comparable to that observed in NH controls tested monaurally. The absence of spatial MSC in CI users likely reflects the poor spatial hearing ability measured in these participants. These findings reveal the importance of studying the impact of CI re-afferentation beyond auditory processing alone, addressing in particular the fundamental mechanisms that serves orienting of multisensory attention in the environment.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2fCgLS3
via IFTTT

Using individual differences to assess modulation-processing mechanisms and age effects

Publication date: Available online 1 November 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Nihaad Paraouty, Christian Lorenzi
This study used a correlational approach to clarify the mechanisms involved in modulation coding. Amplitude-modulation (AM) and frequency-modulation (FM) detection thresholds (AMDTs and FMDTs, respectively) were assessed for 70 normal-hearing listeners. In order to increase between-listeners variability in peripheral coding, participants with a wide range of age (20-70 years) were included. AMDTs and FMDTs were measured at a 5-Hz rate, using a 500-Hz sinusoidal carrier. FMDTs were also measured in the presence of an interfering AM to discourage the use of temporal-envelope cues. The results showed that AMDTs were significantly correlated with FMDTs, but not with FMDTs measured with interfering AM. FMDTs with and without interfering AM were significantly correlated with each other. This pattern of correlation proved to be robust, providing additional evidence that for low carrier frequencies, (i) low-rate AM and FM detection is based on a common code using temporal-envelope cues and (ii) low-rate FM detection is based on an additional code using cues distinct from temporal-envelope. The analyses also showed that age was correlated with FMDTs only. However, no significant difference was found when comparing the various correlations with age. Hence, the effects of age on modulation sensitivity remain unclear.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2ebvApr
via IFTTT

Spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing in unilateral cochlear implant users

Publication date: Available online 31 October 2016
Source:Hearing Research
Author(s): Francesco Pavani, Marta Venturini, Francesca Baruffaldi, Luca Artesini, Francesca Bonfioli, Giuseppe Nicolò Frau, Wieske van Zoest
In the present study we examined the integrity of spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing (MSC) mechanisms in unilateral CI users. We tested 17 unilateral CI users and 17 age-matched normal hearing (NH) controls in an elevation-discrimination task for visual targets delivered at peripheral locations. Visual targets were presented alone (visual-only condition) or together with abrupt sounds that matched or did not match the location of the visual targets (audio-visual conditions). All participants were also tested in simple pointing to free-field sounds task, to obtain a basic measure of their spatial hearing ability in the naturalistic environment in which the experiment was conducted. Hearing controls were tested both in binaural and monaural conditions. NH controls showed spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination for visual targets that matched sound cues) both in the binaural and in the monaural hearing conditions. In addition, they showed non-spatial MSC benefits (i.e., faster discrimination responses in audio-visual conditions compared to visual-only conditions, regardless of sound cue location) in the monaural condition. Monaural CI users showed no spatial MSC benefits, but retained non-spatial MSC benefits comparable to that observed in NH controls tested monaurally. The absence of spatial MSC in CI users likely reflects the poor spatial hearing ability measured in these participants. These findings reveal the importance of studying the impact of CI re-afferentation beyond auditory processing alone, addressing in particular the fundamental mechanisms that serves orienting of multisensory attention in the environment.



from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2fCgLS3
via IFTTT

Electrically Evoked Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Effects on Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Guinea Pigs

Abstract

Stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) are produced by cochlear irregularities reflecting energy from the peak region of the traveling wave (TW). Activation of medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferents reduces cochlear amplification and otoacoustic emissions (OAEs). In other OAEs, MOC activation can produce enhancements. The extent of MOC enhancements of SFOAEs has not been previously studied. In anesthetized guinea pigs, we electrically stimulated MOC fibers and recorded their effects on SFOAEs. MOC stimulation mostly inhibited SFOAEs but sometimes enhanced them. Some enhancements were not near response dips and therefore cannot be explained by a reduction of wavelet cancelations. MOC stimulation always inhibited auditory-nerve compound action potentials showing that cochlear-amplifier gain was not increased. We propose that some SFOAE enhancements arise because shocks excite only a small number of MOC fibers that inhibit a few scattered outer hair cells thereby changing (perhaps increasing) cochlear irregularities and SFOAE amplitudes. Contralateral sound activation is expected to excite approximately one third of MOC efferents and may also change cochlear irregularities. Some papers suggest that large SFOAE components originate far basal of the TW peak, basal of the region that receives cochlear amplification. Using a time-frequency analysis, we separated SFOAEs into components with different latencies. At all SFOAE latencies, most SFOAE components were inhibited by MOC stimulation, but some were enhanced. The MOC inhibition of short-latency SFOAE components is consistent with these components being produced in the cochlear-amplified region near the TW peak.

from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2fpF7PC
via IFTTT