Relation of distortion-product otoacoustic emission input-output functions to loudness

Abstract

The aim of this study is to further explore the relationship between distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements and categorical loudness scaling (CLS) measurements using multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis. Recently, Thorson et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1282-1295] obtained predictions of CLS loudness ratings from DPOAE input/output (I/O) functions using MLR analysis. The present study extends that work by (1) considering two different (and potentially improved) MLR models, one for predicting loudness rating at specified input level and the other for predicting the input level for each loudness category and (2) validating the new models' predictions using an independent set of data. Strong correlations were obtained between predicted and measured data during the validation process with overall root-mean-square errors in the range 10.43-16.78 dB for the prediction of CLS input level, supporting the view that DPOAE I/O measurements can predict CLS loudness ratings and input levels, and thus may be useful for fitting hearing aids.

Categorical loudness scaling and equal-loudness contours in listeners with normal hearing and hearing loss

“…Under these circumstances, previous measurements of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and CLS in the same participants suggest that distortion-product otoacoustic emissions measurements may be used to predict the loudness function (Thorson et al, 2012;Rasetshwane et al, 2013).…”

“…The CLS-function analysis followed the procedure described by Al-Salim et al (2010) and Rasetshwane et al (2013). In this analysis procedure, outliers were removed and the median SPL for each CU was calculated.…”

“…Note that because of the fitting procedure, the CLS function can include dB SPL values that are greater than the maximum output of our sound delivery system (110 dB SPL). Following previous studies (e.g., Anweiler and Verhey, 2006;Al-Salim et al, 2010;Rasetshwane et al, 2013;Heeren et al, 2013;Oetting et al, 2014), all subsequent analyses were performed on the fitted CLS function.…”

Effects of relative and absolute frequency in the spectral weighting of loudness

“…Many investigators have attempted to relate psychophysical loudness functions to input-output characteristics of the cochlea. It is reasonable to assume that the perceived loudness reflects the effective output of cochlear processing, and therefore these studies have achieved a certain amount of success in relating loudness functions for "narrowband signals" to specific physiological measures such as otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses (Epstein and Silva, 2009;Neely et al, 2003;Rasetshwane et al, 2013;Schlauch et al, 1998;Thorson et al, 2012). These schemes, however, have never been tested for signals that are broadband in nature.…”

Physiology, Psychoacoustics and Cognition in Normal and Impaired Hearing

“…The effect of threshold microstructure (as measured by OAEs) on loudness perception is particularly noteworthy because relative loudness is also known to be one of the most important factors affecting the decision weights listeners place on different information-bearing components of sounds (Berg 1990;Lutfi and Jesteadt 2006;Epstein and Silva 2009;Thorson 2012;Rasetshwane et al 2013). This suggests that OAEs might be used to diagnose difficulty in target-in-noise listening tasks through their impact on decision weights.…”