D. Wesley Grantham

Temporal processing in the aging auditory system

Measures of monaural temporal processing and binaural sensitivity were obtained from 12 young (mean age = 26.1 years) and 12 elderly (mean age = 70.9 years) adults with clinically normal hearing (pure-tone thresholds < or = 20 dB HL from 250 to 6000 Hz). Monaural temporal processing was measured by gap detection thresholds. Binaural sensitivity was measured by interaural time difference (ITD) thresholds. Gap and ITD thresholds were obtained at three sound levels (4, 8, or 16 dB above individual threshold). Subjects were also tested on two measures of speech perception, a masking level difference (MLD) task, and a syllable identification/discrimination task that included phonemes varying in voice onset time (VOT). Elderly listeners displayed poorer monaural temporal analysis (higher gap detection thresholds) and poorer binaural processing (higher ITD thresholds) at all sound levels. There were significant interactions between age and sound level, indicating that the age difference was larger at lower stimulus levels. Gap detection performance was found to correlate significantly with performance on the ITD task for young, but not elderly adult listeners. Elderly listeners also performed more poorly than younger listeners on both speech measures; however, there was no significant correlation between psychoacoustic and speech measures of temporal processing. Findings suggest that age-related factors other than peripheral hearing loss contribute to temporal processing deficits of elderly listeners.

Detectability of varying interaural temporal differencesa)

Dectectability and salience of time‐varying interaural temporal differences (IATD’s) were measured in three experiments by determining observers’ ability to follow the temporal fluctuations of a ’’moving stimulus’’—a 3000‐Hz low‐pass computer‐generated noise presented binaurally with a sinusoidally varying IATD. In the first two experiments the peak IATD (Δt the ’’extent of movement’’) was manipulated to determine, for different rates of interaural variation (fm), threshold discriminability of the ’’moving’’ stimulus from a reference (two‐interval forced‐choice paradigm). The nonmoving reference was either a dichotic noise stimulus (experiment 1) or a diotic noise stimulus whose ’’image width’’ matched that of the excursions traced by the ’’moving stimulus’’ (experiment 2). Threshold Δt’s in the two experiments were similar, increasing from 30 μs at fm=0 Hz to 90 μs at fm=20 Hz, indicating a ’’low‐pass characteristic’’ for the binaural system. Thresholds decreased again for fm≳50 Hz, apparently because at...

Modulation masking: Effects of modulation frequency, depth, and phase

Modulation thresholds were measured for a sinusoidally amplitude-modulated (SAM) broadband noise in the presence of a SAM broadband background noise with a modulation depth (mm) of 0.00, 0.25, or 0.50, where the condition mm = 0.00 corresponds to standard (unmasked) modulation detection. The modulation frequency of the masker was 4, 16, or 64 Hz; the modulation frequency of the signal ranged from 2-512 Hz. The greatest amount of modulation masking (masked threshold minus unmasked threshold) typically occurred when the signal frequency was near the masker frequency. The modulation masking patterns (amount of modulation masking versus signal frequency) for the 4-Hz masker were low pass, whereas the patterns for the 16- and 64-Hz maskers were somewhat bandpass (although not strictly so). In general, the greater the modulation depth of the masker, the greater the amount of modulation masking (although this trend was reversed for the 4-Hz masker at high signal frequencies). These modulation-masking data suggest that there are channels in the auditory system which are tuned for the detection of modulation frequency, much like there are channels (critical bands or auditory filters) tuned for the detection of spectral frequency.

Horizontal-Plane Localization of Noise and Speech Signals by Postlingually Deafened Adults Fitted With Bilateral Cochlear Implants *

Objectives: The main purpose of the study was to assess the ability of adults with bilateral cochlear implants to localize noise and speech signals in the horizontal plane. A second objective was to measure the change in localization performance in these adults between approximately 5 and 15 mo after activation. A third objective was to evaluate the relative roles of interaural level difference (ILD) and interaural temporal difference (ITD) cues in localization by these subjects. Design: Twenty-two adults, all postlingually deafened and all bilaterally fitted with MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implants, were tested in a modified source identification task. Subjects were tested individually in an anechoic chamber, which contained an array of 43 numbered loudspeakers extending from –90° to +90° azimuth. On each trial, a 200-msec signal (either a noise burst or a speech sample) was presented from one of 17 active loudspeakers (span: ±80°), and the subject had to identify which source from the 43 loudspeakers in the array produced the signal. Subjects were tested in three conditions: left device only active, right device only active, and both devices active. Twelve of the 22 subjects were retested approximately 10 mo after their first test. In Experiment 2, the spectral content and rise-decay time of the noise stimulus were manipulated. Results: The relationship between source azimuth and response azimuth was characterized in terms of the adjusted constant error (Ĉ). (1) With both devices active, Ĉ for the noise stimulus varied from 8.1° to 43.4° (mean: 24.1°). By comparison, Ĉ for a group of listeners with normal hearing ranged from 3.5° to 7.8° (mean: 5.6°). When subjects listened in unilateral mode (with one device turned off), Ĉ was at or near chance (50.5°) in all cases. However, when considering unilateral performance on each subjects better side, average Ĉ for the speech stimulus was 47.9°, which was significantly (but only slightly) better than chance. (2) When listening bilaterally, error score was significantly lower for the speech stimulus (mean Ĉ = 21.5°) than for the noise stimulus (mean Ĉ = 24.1°). (3) As a group, the 12 subjects who were retested 10 mo after their first visit showed no significant improvement in localization performance during the intervening time. However, two subjects who performed very poorly during their first visit showed dramatic improvement (error scores were halved) over the intervening time. In Experiment 2, removing the high-frequency content of noise signals resulted in significantly poorer performance, but removing the low-frequency content or increasing the rise-decay time did not have an effect. Conclusions: In agreement with previously reported data, subjects with bilateral cochlear implants localized sounds in the horizontal plane remarkably well when using both of their devices, but they generally could not localize sounds when either device was deactivated. They could localize the speech signal with slightly, but significantly better accuracy than the noise, possibly due to spectral differences in the signals, to the availability of envelope ITD cues with the speech but not the noise signal, or to more central factors related to the social salience of speech signals. For most subjects the remarkable ability to localize sounds has stabilized by 5 mo after activation. However, for some subjects who perform poorly initially, there can be substantial improvement past 5 mo. Results from Experiment 2 suggest that ILD cues underlie localization ability for noise signals, and that ITD cues do not contribute.

Detectability of a pulsed tone in the presence of a masker with time‐varying interaural correlation

Detectability of a filtered probe tone (250, 500, or 1000 Hz) was measured in the presence of a narrow-band Gaussian masker centered at the signal frequency. The signal was interaurally phase-reversed (Spi), and the maskers interaural correlation varied sinusoidally between +1.00 (NO) and -1.00 (Npi) at a varaible rate (fm = 0--4 Hz). The signal was presented at various points on the maskers modulation cycle. For 0-Hz modulation (fixed interaural correlation) signal threshold decreased monotonically as the maskers interaural correlation was changed from -1.00 to +1.00 (by a total of about 20, 16, and 8 dB, respectively, for 250-, 500-, and 1000-Hz signals). For fm greater than 0 the function relating signal threshold to the maskers interaural correlation at the moment of signal presentation became progressively flatter with increasing fm for all signal frequencies. For fm = 4 Hz the function was flat; there was no measurable effect of masker interaural correlation on signal detectability. Estimates of minimum binaural integration time based on these data ranged from 44--243 ms, supporting previous studies which have noted the binaural systems relative insensitivity to dynamic stimulation. Additionally, the estimated time constants were approximately twice as large at 250 Hz as at 500 Hz, indicating observers could follow binaural fluctuations better at 500 Hz. The time-constant estimates at 1000 Hz were not suggiciently reliable to permit comparisons with the lower-frequency data.

Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing.

Objectives: The main purpose of the study was to measure thresholds for interaural time differences (ITDs) and interaural level differences (ILDs) for acoustically presented noise signals in adults with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). A secondary purpose was to assess the correlation between the ILD and ITD thresholds and error scores in a horizontal-plane localization task, to test the hypothesis that localization by individuals with bilateral implants is mediated by the processing of ILD cues. Design: Eleven adults, all postlingually deafened and all bilaterally fitted with MED-EL COMBI 40+ CIs, were tested in ITD and ILD discrimination tasks in which signals were presented acoustically through headphones that fit over their two devices. The stimulus was a 200-msec burst of Gaussian noise bandpass filtered from 100 to 4000 Hz. A two-interval forced-choice adaptive procedure was used in which the subject had to respond on each trial whether the lateral positions of the two sound images (with the interaural difference favoring the left and right sides in the two intervals) moved from left-to-right or right-to-left. Results: In agreement with previously reported data, ITD thresholds for the subjects with bilateral implants were poor. The best threshold was ∼400 &mgr;sec, and only five of 11 subjects tested achieved thresholds <1000 &mgr;sec. In contrast, ILD thresholds were relatively good; mean threshold was 3.8 dB with the initial compression circuit on the implant devices activated and 1.9 dB with the compression deactivated. The ILD and ITD thresholds were higher than previously reported thresholds obtained with direct electrical stimulation (generally, <1.0 dB and 100 to 200 &mgr;sec, respectively). When the data from two outlying subjects were omitted, ILD thresholds were highly correlated with total error score in a horizontal-plane localization task, computed for sources near midline (r = 0.87, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The higher ILD and ITD thresholds obtained in this study with acoustically presented signals (when compared with prior data with direct electrical stimulation) can be attributed—at least partially—to the signal processing carried out by the CI in the former case. The processing strategy effectively leaves only envelope information as a basis for ITD discrimination, which, for the acoustically presented noise stimuli, is mainly coded in the onset information. The operation of the compression circuit reduces the ILDs in the signal, leading to elevated ILD thresholds for the acoustically presented signals in this condition. The large magnitude of the ITD thresholds indicates that ITDs could not have contributed to the performance in the horizontal-plane localization task. Overall, the results suggest that for subjects using bilateral implants, localization of noise signals is mediated entirely by ILD cues, with little or no contribution from ITD information.

Minimum audible movement angle in the horizontal plane as a function of stimulus frequency and bandwidth, source azimuth, and velocity

Minimum audible movement angles (MAMAs) were measured in the horizontal plane for four normal-hearing adult subjects in a darkened anechoic chamber. On each trial, a single stimulus was presented, and the subject had to say whether it came from a stationary loudspeaker or from a loudspeaker that was moving at a constant angular velocity around him. Thresholds were established by adaptively varying stimulus duration. In experiment 1, MAMAs were measured as a function of center frequency (500-5000 Hz), velocity (10 degrees-180 degrees/s), and direction of motion (left versus right). There was no effect of direction of motion. MAMAs increased with velocity, from an average of 8.8 degrees of arc for a target moving at 10 degrees/s to an average of 20.2 degrees of arc for a target moving at 180 degrees/s. MAMAs were higher for a 3000-Hz tone than for tones of lower or higher frequencies, as has been previously reported [D. R. Perrott and J. Tucker, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1522-1527 (1988)]. In experiment 2, minimum audible angles (MAAs) were measured with sequentially presented stationary tone pulses (500-5000 Hz), and were shown to exhibit the same dependence on signal frequency that the MAMAs showed (average MAA at 3000 Hz: 8.4 degrees; average MAA at the other frequencies: 3.4 degrees). In experiment 3, MAMAs and MAAs were measured as a function of stimulus bandwidth (centered at 3000 Hz) and listening azimuth (0 degrees vs 60 degrees). Average MAAs decreased monotonically as stimulus bandwidth increased from 0 Hz to wideband (from 8.4 degrees to 1.2 degrees at 0 degrees azimuth; from 11.3 degrees to 1.5 degrees at 60 degrees azimuth). As in experiment 1, MAMAs increased with stimulus velocity, from values comparable to the MAAs for the slowest-velocity (10 degrees/s) targets to 70 degrees of arc or more in the poorest condition (third-octave band of noise presented at a velocity of 180 degrees/s and an azimuth of 60 degrees). MAMAs obtained in the slower-velocity conditions depended in the same way on stimulus bandwidth and listening azimuth that MAAs depended on these variables. In no case was the MAMA ever smaller than the MAA. It is hypothesized that a minimum integration time is required to achieve optimal performance in a dynamic spatial resolution task. Average estimates of this minimum time based on the current data vary from 336 ms (for targets presented at midline) to 1116 ms (for narrow-band targets presented at 60 degrees azimuth).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Speech Recognition for Unilateral and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Modes in the Presence of Uncorrelated Noise Sources

Objective: The purpose of the current investigation was to compare speech recognition in noise for bilateral and unilateral modes within postlingually deafened, adult bilateral cochlear implant recipients. In addition, it was of interest to evaluate the time course of the bilateral speech-recognition advantage and the effect of changing signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on the magnitude of the bilateral advantage. Design: In the first experiment, 16 postlingually deafened adults who were bilaterally implanted with the MED-EL C40+ cochlear device were evaluated in unilateral left, unilateral right, and bilateral conditions 4 to 7 mo after activation. Speech recognition in the presence of five spatially separated, uncorrelated noise sources was evaluated using both a single fixed SNR of +10 dB and an adaptive-SNR method. In a follow-up study, a subset of 10 participants was re-evaluated using an identical fixed-SNR method 12 to 17 mo after activation to examine the time course of speech-recognition performance in both unilateral and bilateral modes at a single SNR. A third study was performed with a subset of six participants to examine performance over a range of SNRs. In this study, speech recognition was measured 12 to 17 mo after activation in quiet and at +5, +10, +15, and +20 dB SNRs using the same five uncorrelated noise sources. Results: The speech-recognition data revealed a significant bilateral advantage of 3.3 dB using the adaptive-SNR method. A significant bilateral advantage of 9% was also measured using a fixed +10 dB SNR. Results from the second study revealed that experience resulted in a significant (11 to 20%) increase in speech-recognition-in-noise performance for both unilateral and bilateral modes; however, the magnitude of the bilateral advantage was not affected by experience. Results from the third study revealed the largest bilateral advantage at the poorest SNR evaluated. In addition, performance in quiet was significantly better than that measured in the presence of noise, even at the +20 dB SNR. Conclusions: The results of these experiments support a small but significant bilateral speech-recognition-in-noise advantage for cochlear implant recipients in an environment with multiple noise sources. This advantage is presumed to be attributable to the combined effects of binaural squelch and diotic summation. Although experience generally improved speech-recognition-in-noise performance in both unilateral and bilateral modes, a consistent bilateral advantage (approximately 10%) was measured at 4 to 7 mo and at 12 to 17 mo postactivation.

Auditory spatial resolution in horizontal, vertical, and diagonal planes

Minimum audible angle (MAA) and minimum audible movement angle (MAMA) thresholds were measured for stimuli in horizontal, vertical, and diagonal (60 degrees) planes. A pseudovirtual technique was employed in which signals were recorded through KEMARs ears and played back to subjects through insert earphones. Thresholds were obtained for wideband, high-pass, and low-pass noises. Only 6 of 20 subjects obtained wideband vertical-plane MAAs less than 10 degrees, and only these 6 subjects were retained for the complete study. For all three filter conditions thresholds were lowest in the horizontal plane, slightly (but significantly) higher in the diagonal plane, and highest for the vertical plane. These results were similar in magnitude and pattern to those reported by Perrott and Saberi [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 1728-1731 (1990)] and Saberi and Perrott [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 2639-2644 (1990)], except that these investigators generally found that thresholds for diagonal planes were as good as those for the horizontal plane. The present results are consistent with the hypothesis that diagonal-plane performance is based on independent contributions from a horizontal-plane system (sensitive to interaural differences) and a vertical-plane system (sensitive to pinna-based spectral changes). Measurements of the stimuli recorded through KEMAR indicated that sources presented from diagonal planes can produce larger interaural level differences (ILDs) in certain frequency regions than would be expected based on the horizontal projection of the trajectory. Such frequency-specific ILD cues may underlie the very good performance reported in previous studies for diagonal spatial resolution. Subjects in the present study could apparently not take advantage of these cues in the diagonal-plane condition, possibly because they did not externalize the images to their appropriate positions in space or possibly because of the absence of a patterned visual field.

Echo suppression and discrimination suppression aspects of the precedence effect.

The precedence effect is a phenomenon that may occur when a sound from one direction (the lead) is followed within a few milliseconds by the same or a similar sound from another direction (the lag, or the echo). Typically, the lag sound is not heard as a separate event, and changes in the lag sound’s direction cannot be discriminated. The hypothesis is proposed in this study that these two aspects of precedence (echo suppression and discrimination suppression) are at least partially independent phenomena. Two experiments were conducted in which pairs of noise bursts were presented to subjects from two loudspeakers in the horizontal plane to simulate a lead sound and a lag sound (the echo). Echo suppression threshold was measured as the minimum echo delay at which subjects reported hearing two sounds rather than one sound; discrimination suppression threshold was measured as the minimum echo delay at which subjects could reliably discriminate between two positions of the echo. In Experiment 1, it was found that echo suppression threshold was the same as discrimination suppression threshold when measured with a single burst pair (average 5.4 msec). However, when measured after presentation of a train of burst pairs (a condition that may produce “buildup of suppression”), discrimination suppression threshold increased to 10.4 msec, while echo suppression threshold increased to 26.4 msec. The greater buildup of echo suppression than of discrimination suppression indicates that the two phenomena are distinct under buildup conditions and may be the reflection of different underlying mechanisms. Experiment 2 investigated the effect of the directional properties of the lead and lag sounds on discrimination suppression and echo suppression. There was no consistent effect of the spatial separation between lead and lag sources on discrimination suppression or echo suppression, nor was there any consistent difference between the two types of thresholds (overall average threshold was 5.9 msec). The negative result in Experiment 2 may have been due to the measurements being obtained only for single-stimulus conditions and not for buildup conditions that may involve more central processing by the auditory system.