Click- and chirp-evoked human compound action potentials

Chertoff, Mark E.; Lichtenhan, Jeffery T.; Willis, Marie

doi:10.1121/1.3372756

Cited by 41 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, the interval between wave-I and wave-V peaks has been shown to be remarkably robust across stimulus level in ABR recordings (Don and Eggermont, 1978;Eggermont and Don, 1980), indicating that a level-dependent UR is not required. Contradictory to this, however, Chertoff et al (2010) measured CAPs latency in humans, and demonstrated that CAPs could have a smaller latency change with level than what has been reported for ABR wave-V latency (Serpanos et al, 1997;Dau, 2003;. This would tend to suggest that the wave-I (which is believed to have the same origin as the CAP) to wave-V interval, and thus the UR, should be level-dependent.…”

Section: B Effects Of the Ur Functionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Further, the CAP latencies of Chertoff et al (2010) decrease by À0.030 ms/ dB over the level range of 75-105 dB SPL. So, even if a level-dependent UR was implemented to account for the difference in latency change between Chertoff et al (2010) and , the AN model would still underpredict the wave-V latency. It thus remains unclear why the model fails to account more accurately for the leveldependent behavior of wave-V latency.…”

Section: Wave-v Latency Dependency On Frequency and Levelmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to transient stimuli

Rønne

Dau

Harte

et al. 2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A quantitative model is presented that describes the formation of auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) to tone pulses, clicks, and rising chirps as a function of stimulation level. The model computes the convolution of the instantaneous discharge rates using the "humanized" nonlinear auditory-nerve model of Zilany and Bruce [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 402-417 (2007)] and an empirically derived unitary response function which is assumed to reflect contributions from different cell populations within the auditory brainstem, recorded at a given pair of electrodes on the scalp. It is shown that the model accounts for the decrease of tone-pulse evoked wave-V latency with frequency but underestimates the level dependency of the tone-pulse as well as click-evoked latency values. Furthermore, the model correctly predicts the nonlinear wave-V amplitude behavior in response to the chirp stimulation both as a function of chirp sweeping rate and level. Overall, the results support the hypothesis that the pattern of ABR generation is strongly affected by the nonlinear and dispersive processes in the cochlea.

show abstract

Section: B Effects Of the Ur Functionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Wave-v Latency Dependency On Frequency and Levelmentioning

confidence: 97%

Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to transient stimuli

Rønne

Dau

Harte

et al. 2012

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CAP measurements were made from the first negative peak in the ABR waveform recorded with an electrode placed on the tympanic membrane (Lichtenhan & Chertoff 2008; Chertoff et al 2010). The MOC reflex was activated by contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS) that was alternated on and off across runs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medial olivocochlear efferent reflex inhibition of human cochlear nerve responses

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inhibition of cochlear amplifier gain by the medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferent system has several putative roles: aiding listening in noise, protection against damage from acoustic overexposure, and slowing age-induced hearing loss. The human MOC reflex has been studied almost exclusively by measuring changes in otoacoustic emissions. However, to help understand how the MOC system influences what we hear, it is important to have measurements of the MOC effect on the total output of the organ of Corti, i.e., on cochlear nerve responses that couple sounds to the brain. In this work we measured the inhibition produced by the MOC reflex on the amplitude of cochlear nerve compound action potentials (CAPs) in response to moderate level (52–60 dB peSPL) clicks from five, young, normal hearing, awake, alert, human adults. MOC activity was elicited by 65 dB SPL, contralateral broadband noise (CAS). Using tympanic membrane electrodes, approximately 10 hours of data collection were needed from each subject to yield reliable measurements of the MOC reflex inhibition on CAP amplitudes from one click level. The CAS produced a 16% reduction of CAP amplitude, equivalent to a 1.98 dB effective attenuation (averaged over five subjects). Based on previous reports of efferent effects as functions of level and frequency, it is possible that much larger effective attenuations would be observed at lower sound levels or with clicks of higher frequency content. For a preliminary comparison, we also measured MOC reflex inhibition of DPOAEs evoked from the same ears with f2’s near 4 kHz. The resulting effective attenuations on DPOAEs were, on average, less than half the effective attenuations on CAPs.

show abstract

“…For instance, wave V latency decreases with increasing frequency (e.g., Gorga et al, 1988;Dau, 2003;Rasetshwane et al, 2013), reflecting the shorter travel time required by the traveling wave to excite more basal (higher-frequency) regions of the cochlea. Additionally, when evoked by rising-frequency chirps designed to compensate for traveling-wave dispersion, the amplitude of wave V is larger than it is for both clicks and falling-frequency chirps (Dau et al, 2000;Elberling and Don, 2008; wave I amplitude exhibits similar behavior- Shore and Nuttall, 1985;Chertoff et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Tone-burst auditory brainstem response wave V latencies in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears

Lewis

Kopun

Neely

et al. 2015

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The metric used to equate stimulus level [sound pressure level (SPL) or sensation level (SL)] between ears with normal hearing (NH) and ears with hearing loss (HL) in comparisons of auditory function can influence interpretation of results. When stimulus level is equated in dB SL, higher SPLs are presented to ears with HL due to their reduced sensitivity. As a result, it may be difficult to determine if differences between ears with NH and ears with HL are due to cochlear pathology or level-dependent changes in cochlear mechanics. To the extent that level-dependent changes in cochlear mechanics contribute to auditory brainstem response latencies, comparisons between normal and pathologic ears may depend on the stimulus levels at which comparisons are made. To test this hypothesis, wave V latencies were measured in 16 NH ears and 15 ears with mild-to-moderate HL. When stimulus levels were equated in SL, latencies were shorter in HL ears. However, latencies were similar for NH and HL ears when stimulus levels were equated in SPL. These observations demonstrate that the effect of stimulus level on wave V latency is large relative to the effect of HL, at least in cases of mild-to-moderate HL.

show abstract

Click- and chirp-evoked human compound action potentials

Cited by 41 publications

References 17 publications

Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to transient stimuli

Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to transient stimuli

Medial olivocochlear efferent reflex inhibition of human cochlear nerve responses

Tone-burst auditory brainstem response wave V latencies in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About