Temporal integration of loudness in listeners with hearing losses of primarily cochlear origin

Abstract

To investigate how hearing loss of primarily cochlear origin affects the loudness of brief tones, loudness matches between 5-and 200-ms tones were obtained as a function of level for 15 listeners with cochlear impairments and for seven age-matched controls. Three frequencies, usually 0.5, 1, and 4 kHz, were tested in each listener using a two-interval, two-alternative forced-choice ͑2I, 2AFC͒ paradigm with a roving-level, up-down adaptive procedure. Results for the normal listeners generally were consistent with published data ͓e.g., Florentine et al., J. Acoust Soc. Am. 99, 1633-1644 ͑1996͔͒. The amount of temporal integration-defined as the level difference between equally loud short and long tones-varied nonmonotonically with level and was largest at moderate levels. No consistent effect of frequency was apparent. The impaired listeners varied widely, but most showed a clear effect of level on the amount of temporal integration. Overall, their results appear consistent with expectations based on knowledge of the general properties of their loudness-growth functions and the equal-loudness-ratio hypothesis, which states that the loudness ratio between equal-SPL long and brief tones is the same at all SPLs. The impaired listeners' amounts of temporal integration at high SPLs often were larger than normal, although it was reduced near threshold. When evaluated at equal SLs, the amount of temporal integration well above threshold usually was in the low end of the normal range. Two listeners with abrupt high-frequency hearing losses ͑slopes Ͼ50 dB/octave͒ showed larger-than-normal maximal amounts of temporal integration ͑40 to 50 dB͒. This finding is consistent with the shallow loudness functions predicted by our excitation-pattern model for impaired listeners ͓Florentine et al., in Modeling Sensorineural Hearing Loss, edited by W. Jesteadt ͑Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 1997͒, pp. 187-198͔. Loudness functions derived from impaired listeners' temporal-integration functions indicate that restoration of loudness in listeners with cochlear hearing loss usually will require the same gain whether the sound is short or long.

Using magnitude estimation to investigate the perceptual components of signal detection theory

“…Conversely, our data show a relatively weak relation between these measures when the subjects were asked to estimate the magnitude of tone duration. Importantly, for each stimulus quality (i.e., intensity and duration), the strength of the relation between the two measures of sensitivity was consistent with the implications of previous findings (Buus et al, 1999;Creelman, 1964;Green et al, 1964;Munson, 1947). Together, these findings suggest that the both d ME and d¢ ME accurately reflect the subject's sensitivity to a target stimulus, along a specific stimulus dimension (e.g., tone intensity).…”

“…Specifically, listeners detect tones of expected duration better than tones of unexpected duration. Finally, in those cases in which tone duration does influence detection (durations less than 200 msec), longer tones are perceived as more intense (Buus, Florentine, & Poulsen, 1999;Munson, 1947). In this case, it appears that increased detection is a result of perceived intensity rather than perceived duration.…”

Towards a Unifying Basis of Auditory Thresholds: The Effects of Hearing Loss on Temporal Integration Reconsidered

“…Sensorineural hearing losses, whether due to noise trauma, presbyacusis, ototoxic drugs, or diseases, are not only characterized by elevated thresholds but also often by significantly shallower slopes of temporal integration functions compared to normal-hearing subjects (e.g., Miskolczy-Fodor 1953;Harris et al 1958;Henderson 1969;Martin and Wofford 1970;Gengel and Watson 1971;Stelmachowicz and Seewald 1977;Chung and Smith 1980;Dempsey and Maxon 1982;Wall and Stephanson 1982;Davis and Ferraro 1983;Hall and Fernandez 1983;Gorga et al 1984;Hall and Wood 1984;Kidd et al 1984;Clark and Bohne 1986;Florentine et al 1988;Papsin and Abel 1988;Carlyon et al 1990;Saunders et al 1995;Oxenham et al 1997;Buus et al 1999;Hicks and Bacon 1999;Quaranta et al 2001; for review see, e.g., Moore and Oxenham 1998). It is not fully understood what causes the altered slopes of temporal integration functions, knowledge that is crucial when attempting to alleviate the problems associated with sensorineural hearing losses.…”

A measurement of equal-loudness level contours for tone burst

“…Buus et al [2] tested loudness for tone bursts at frequencies of 0.5 kHz, 1 kHz and 4 kHz with equivalent rectangular durations of 5 and 200 ms, and indicated that the average amounts of temporal integration differ neither across frequency nor among listeners. In this study, we measured equal-loudness level contours for tone bursts at frequencies from 315 Hz to 12.5 kHz at intervals of 1/3 octave and compared them to those of ISO 226 [3], as obtained by Robinson and Dadson [4].…”

“…In EX1, the level differences between equally loud 1-kHz 8-ms and long-duration tones lie reasonably between those of 5-ms-200-ms and 30-ms-200-ms tones estimated by Florentine et al [11], although the long tone used in EX1 was a 1-kHz long-duration tone without intervals, not a 1-kHz 200-ms tone. Buus et al [2] tested loudness for tone bursts at frequencies of 0.5 kHz, 1 kHz and 4 kHz with equivalent rectangular durations of 5 and 200 ms and indicated that the average amounts of temporal integration, as defined as the level difference between equally loud short and long tones, differ neither across frequency nor among listeners. The results of EX1 indicate that loudness level contours are similar to those of ISO 226 [3] below 6 kHz.…”