2003
DOI: 10.1121/1.1534838
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cochlear nonlinearity between 500 and 8000 Hz in listeners with normal hearing

Abstract: Cochlear nonlinearity was estimated over a wide range of center frequencies and levels in listeners with normal hearing, using a forward-masking method. For a fixed low-level probe, the masker level required to mask the probe was measured as a function of the masker-probe interval, to produce a temporal masking curve (TMC). TMCs were measured for probe frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz, and for masker frequencies 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, 1.0 (on frequency), 1.1, and 1.6 times the probe frequency. Across … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

30
146
3
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(180 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
30
146
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…If the CWN reduced the postmechanical recovery rate in the apex, then this could account, at least in part, for the present findings. Compression in the apex likely extends to a broad range of frequencies Lopez-Poveda et al 2003) and so our control experiment may not be easily extended to the apex. In any case, the present model of forward masking incorporates the three assumptions in question (i.e., the temporal window was identical across all conditions) and still accounts for the observations very well.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If the CWN reduced the postmechanical recovery rate in the apex, then this could account, at least in part, for the present findings. Compression in the apex likely extends to a broad range of frequencies Lopez-Poveda et al 2003) and so our control experiment may not be easily extended to the apex. In any case, the present model of forward masking incorporates the three assumptions in question (i.e., the temporal window was identical across all conditions) and still accounts for the observations very well.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is particularly true at low frequencies, where compression and hence active cochlear mechanisms occur for a comparatively broader range of stimulus frequencies than at high frequencies Lopez-Poveda et al 2003;Plack and Drga 2003). Here, a physiologically inspired, phenomenological computer model of forward masking with efferent control is used to explain the effects of contralateral stimulation on PTCs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This finding may be evidence for off-frequency nonlinearity in normalhearing listeners (Lopez-Poveda et al 2005;Rosengard et al 2005). Off-frequency nonlinearity may emerge from active basilar membrane mechanics or from the saturating nonlinearity of the IHC receptor potential (Lopez-Poveda et al 2003;Plack and Arifianto 2010). The degree of active processing applied to the off-frequency masker was simulated by adjusting the frequency of the off-frequency masker (f m ), where maskers closer to the probe frequency had greater nonlinearity through the model CF centered on the probe frequency.…”
Section: Sensitivity To F Mmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…As discussed by Poling et al (2012), sources of individual differences among listeners with similar and different thresholds may include (1) the degree of hearing loss, (2) the contribution of outer (OHC) and inner (IHC) hair cell dysfunction to the hearing loss, (3) the degree of cochlear nonlinearity (i.e., compression), (4) the influence of the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex, (5) the ability to make use of stimulus cues for detecting the probe (i.e., detection efficiency), (6) the ratio of frequencies for on-and off-frequency maskers (i.e., the linear reference), (7) durations of the masker and probe (e.g., Lopez-Poveda et al 2003), (8) learning/practice effects, and (9) methods for fitting/ deriving compression. Some of the proposed sources of individual differences in compression estimates originate in a violation of the assumptions made when interpreting TMCs Oxenham 2009, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1) of Lopez-Poveda et al (2005). Individual behavioral level rules were obtained by plotting the fitted levels for the f 1 masker against those for the f 2 masker, paired according to the masker-probe time gaps.…”
Section: Behavioral Rulesmentioning
confidence: 99%