Recent studies of frequency analysis in listeners with normal hearing and in those with sensorineural hearing losses are reviewed and compared with related physiological data. These studies suggest that it is now possible to obtain detailed audiological or psychoacoustic data for human listeners that closely parallel physiological data obtained in eighth nerve recordings from animals. Implications of these developments for future research with impaired listeners are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CameyAE. An analysis of psychophysical tuning curves in normal and pathological ears. Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1977.
2.
HoekstraARitsmaRJ. Perceptive hearing loss and frequency selectivity. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
3.
LeshowitzBLindstromR. Measurement of nonlinearities in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
4.
PickGEvansEFWilsonJP. Frequency resolution in patients with hearing loss of cochlear origin. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
5.
WightmanFLMcGeeTKramerM. Factors influencing frequency selectivity in normal and hearing-impaired listeners. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
6.
ZwickerESchornK. Psychoacoustical tuning curves in audiology. Audiology1978; 17: 120–40.
7.
EvansEF. Auditory frequency selectivity and the cochlear nerve. In: ZwickerETerhardtE, eds. Facts and models in hearing. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1974.
8.
FestenJMHoutgastTPlompRSmoorenburgGF. Relations between individual differences of auditory functions. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
9.
GarnerWRHakeHWEriksenCW. Operationism and the concept of perception. Psychol Rev1956; 63: 149–59.
10.
WegelRLLaneCE. The auditory masking of one pure tone by another and its probable relation to the dynamics of the inner ear. Physiol Rev1924; 23: 266–85.
11.
JergerJTillmanTWPetersonJL. Masking by octave bands of noise in normal and impaired ears. J Acoust Soc Am1960; 32: 385–90.
12.
KeithRWAndersonCV. Remote masking for listeners with cochlear impairment. J Acoust Soc Am1969; 46: 393–8.
MartinEMPickettJM. Sensorineural hearing loss and upward spread of masking. J Speech Hear Res1970; 13: 426–37.
15.
DeBoerEBowmeesterJ. Critical bands and sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology1974; 13: 236–59.
16.
RittmanicPA. Pure-tone masking by narrow-noise bands in normal and impaired ears. J Audiol Res1962; 2: 287–304.
17.
ZwickerE. Masking and physiological excitation as consequences of the ear's frequency analysis. In: PlompRSmoorenburgGF, eds. Frequency analysis and periodicity detection in hearing. Leiden: Sijthoff, 1970.
18.
KiangNYSWatanabeTThomasECClarkLF. Discharge patterns of single fibers in the cat's auditory nerve. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1965.
19.
SmallAM. Pure tone masking. J Acoust Soc Am1959; 31: 1619–25.
20.
VogtenLLM. Pure-tone masking: A new result from a new method. In: ZwickerETerhardtE, eds. Facts and models in hearing. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1974.
21.
ZwickerE. On a psychoacoustical equivalent of tuning curves. In: ZwickerETerhardtE, eds. Facts and models in hearing. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1977.
22.
EvansEF. Temporary sensorineural hearing losses and 8th nerve changes. In: HendersonDHamernikRDDosanjhDSMillsJH, eds. Effects of noise on hearing. New York: Raven Press, 1976.
23.
EvansEFWilsonJ. The frequency selectivity of the cochlea. In: MollerA, ed. Basic mechanisms in hearing. New York: Academic Press, 1973.
24.
FlorentineM. Psychoacoustical tuning curves and narrowband masking in normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am1978; 63: S44A.
25.
LeshowitzBLindstromRZurekP. Measurements of frequency selectivity in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am1976; 59: 52–3A.
26.
KiangNYSMoxonEC. Tails of tuning curves of auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am1974; 55: 620–30.
27.
O'MalleyHFethLL. Relationship between auditory frequency selectivity and two-tone suppression. J Acoust Soc Am1978; 63: 530A.
28.
RodenburgMVerschuureJVBrocaarMP. Comparison of two masking methods. Acustica1974; 31: 99–106.
29.
RodenburgMVerschuureJVBrocaarMP. Comment on Wightman et al (1977). In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
30.
WidinGPViemeisterNF. Intensity effects in forward masking: Implications for psychophysical tuning curves. J Acoust Soc Am1978; 63: S44A.
31.
Johnson-DaviesDPattersonR. Psychophysical tuning curves: The width of the signal's excitation pattern. J Acoust Soc Am1978; 63: S29A.
HoutgastT. Psychophysical evidence for lateral inhibition in hearing. J Acoust Soc Am1972; 51: 1885–94.
34.
HoutgastT. Psychophysical experiments on ‘Tuning Curves' and ‘Two-Tone Inhibition.’Acustica1973; 29: 168–79.
35.
HoutgastT. Lateral suppression in hearing. Dissertation, Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, The Netherlands, 1974.
36.
JavelEGeislerCDRavindranA. Two-tone suppression in auditory nerve of the cat: Rate-intensity and temporal analyses. J Acoust Soc Am1977; 63: 1093–1104.
37.
ShannonRV. Two-tone unmasking and suppression in a forward masking situation. J Acoust Soc Am1976; 59: 1460–70.
38.
WeberDL. Suppression and critical bands in band-limiting experiments. J Acoust Soc Am1978; 64: 141–50.
39.
DuifhuisH. Cochlear nonlinearity and second filter: Possible mechanism and implications. J Acoust Soc Am1976; 59: 408–23.
40.
DuifhuisH. Cochlear nonlinearity and second filter — a psychophysical evaluation. In: EvansEFWilsonJP, eds. Psychophysics and physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press, 1977.
