Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2009

01-12-2009

Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent

Authors: Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda, Peter T. Johannesen

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

When two pure tones (or primaries) of slightly different frequencies (f 1 and f 2) are presented to the ear, new frequency components are generated by nonlinear interaction of the primaries within the cochlea. These new components can be recorded in the ear canal as otoacoustic emissions (OAE). The level of the 2f 1−f 2 OAE component is known as the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and is regarded as an indicator of the physiological state of the cochlea. The current view is that maximal level DPOAEs occur for primaries that produce equal excitation at the f 2 cochlear region, but this notion cannot be directly tested in living humans because it is impossible to record their cochlear responses while monitoring their ear canal DPOAE levels. On the other hand, it has been claimed that the temporal masking curve (TMC) method of inferring human basilar membrane responses allows measurement of the levels of equally effective pure tones at any given cochlear site. The assumptions of this behavioral method, however, lack firm physiological support in humans. Here, the TMC method was applied to test the current notion on the conditions that maximize DPOAE levels in humans. DPOAE and TMC results were mutually consistent for frequencies of 1 and 4 kHz and for levels below around 65 dB sound pressure level. This match supports the current view on the generation of maximal level DPOAEs as well as the assumptions of the behavioral TMC method.
Literature
Cooper NP. Compression in the peripheral auditoy system. In: Bacon SP, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Compression: From Cochlea to Cochlear Implants. New York, Springer, pp. 18–61, 2004.CrossRef
Dorn PA, Konrad-Martin D, Neely ST, Keefe DH, Cyr E, Gorga MP. Distortion product otoacoustic emission input/output functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:3119–3131, 2001.CrossRefPubMed
Duifhuis H. Consequences of peripheral frequency selectivity for nonsimultaneous masking. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 54:1471–1488, 1973.CrossRefPubMed
Fahey PF, Stagner BB, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Nonlinear interactions that could explain distortion product interference response areas. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108:1786–1802, 2000.CrossRefPubMed
Gaskill SA, Brown AM. The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1–f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88:821–839, 1990.CrossRefPubMed
Gorga MP, Neely ST, Ohlrich B, Hoover B, Redner J, Peters J. From laboratory to clinic: a large scale study of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in ears with normal hearing and ears with hearing loss. Ear Hear. 18:440–455, 1997.CrossRefPubMed
He NJ, Schmiedt RA. Fine structure of the 2f1–f2 acoustic distortion product: changes with primary level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94:2659–2669, 1993.CrossRefPubMed
Heitmann J, Waldmann B, Schnitzler H, Plinkert PK, Zenner H. Suppression of distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) near 2f1–f2 removes DP-gram fine structure—evidence for a secondary generator. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:1527–1531, 1998.CrossRef
Johannesen PT, Lopez-Poveda EA. Cochlear nonlinearity in normal-hearing subjects as inferred psychophysically and from distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124:2149–2163, 2008.CrossRefPubMed
Johnson TA, Neely ST, Garner CA, Gorga MP. Influence of primary-level and primary-frequency ratios on human distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119:418–428, 2006.CrossRefPubMed
Kalluri R, Shera CA. Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109:622–637, 2001.CrossRefPubMed
Kemp DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 64:1386–1391, 1978.CrossRefPubMed
Kummer P, Janssen T, Arnold W. The level and growth behavior of the 2 f1–f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission and its relationship to auditory sensitivity in normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:3431–3444, 1998.CrossRefPubMed
Kummer P, Janssen T, Hulin P, Arnold W. Optimal L(1)–L(2) primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans. Hear Res. 146:47–56, 2000.CrossRefPubMed
Levitt H. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49(Suppl 2)1971.
Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. The clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear. 11:144–154, 1990.CrossRefPubMed
Lopez-Poveda EA, Alves-Pinto A. A variant temporal-masking-curve method for inferring peripheral auditory compression. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123:1544–1554, 2008.CrossRefPubMed
Lopez-Poveda EA, Johannesen PT. Otoacoustic emission theories can be tested with behavioral methods. In: Lopez-Poveda EA, Palmer AR, Meddis R (eds) Advances in Auditory Research: Physiology, Psychophysics, and Models. New York, Springer.
Lopez-Poveda EA, Plack CJ, Meddis R. Cochlear nonlinearity between 500 and 8000 Hz in listeners with normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113:951–960, 2003.CrossRefPubMed
Lopez-Poveda EA, Plack CJ, Meddis R, Blanco JL. Cochlear compression in listeners with moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Hear Res. 205:172–183, 2005.CrossRefPubMed
Martin GK, Jassir D, Stagner BB, Whitehead ML, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Locus of generation for the 2f1–f2 vs 2f2–f1 distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing humans revealed by suppression tuning, onset latencies, and amplitude correlations. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103:1957–1971, 1998.CrossRefPubMed
Mauermann M, Kollmeier B. Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) input/output functions and the influence of the second DPOAE source. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116:2199–2212, 2004.CrossRefPubMed
Mills DM, Rubel EW. Variation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions with furosemide injection. Hear Res. 77:183–199, 1994.CrossRefPubMed
Moore BC, Glasberg BR. Growth of forward masking for sinusoidal and noise maskers as a function of signal delay; implications for suppression in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73:1249–1259, 1983.CrossRefPubMed
Neely ST, Johnson TA, Gorga MP. Distortion-product otoacoustic emission measured with continuously varying stimulus level. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117:1248–1259, 2005.CrossRefPubMed
Nelson DA, Freyman RL. Temporal resolution in sensorineural hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 81:709–720, 1987.CrossRefPubMed
Nelson DA, Schroder AC. Peripheral compression as a function of stimulus level and frequency region in normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115:2221–2233, 2004.CrossRefPubMed
Nelson DA, Schroder AC, Wojtczak M. A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110:2045–2064, 2001.CrossRefPubMed
Oxenham AJ, Moore BC. Modeling the additivity of nonsimultaneous masking. Hear Res 80:105–118, 1994.CrossRefPubMed
Oxenham AJ, Moore BC. Additivity of masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98:1921–1934, 1995.CrossRefPubMed
Oxenham AJ, Moore BC, Vickers DA. Short-term temporal integration: evidence for the influence of peripheral compression. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:3676–3687, 1997.CrossRefPubMed
Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ. A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:3666–3675, 1997.CrossRefPubMed
Plack CJ, Drga V. Psychophysical evidence for auditory compression at low characteristic frequencies. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113:1574–1586, 2003.CrossRefPubMed
Plack CJ, Drga V, Lopez-Poveda EA. Inferred basilar-membrane response functions for listeners with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115:1684–1695, 2004.CrossRefPubMed
Rhode WS. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions and basilar membrane vibration in the 6–9 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122:2725–2737, 2007.CrossRefPubMed
Robles L, Ruggero MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol. Rev. 81:1305–1352, 2001.PubMed
Rosengard PS, Oxenham AJ, Braida LD. Comparing different estimates of cochlear compression in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117:3028–3041, 2005.CrossRefPubMed
Ruggero MA, Rich NC, Recio A, Narayan SS, Robles L. Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:2151–2163, 1997.CrossRefPubMed
Shaffer LA, Withnell RH, Dhar S, Lilly DJ, Goodman SS, Harmon KM. Sources and mechanisms of DPOAE generation: implications for the prediction of auditory sensitivity. Ear Hear. 24:367–379, 2003.CrossRefPubMed
Shera CA, Guinan JJ, Jr. Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105:782–798, 1999.CrossRefPubMed
Shera CA, Guinan JJ, Jr. Cochlear traveling-wave amplification, suppression, and beamforming probed using noninvasive calibration of intracochlear distortion sources. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121:1003–1016, 2007.CrossRefPubMed
Whitehead ML, Stagner BB, McCoy MJ, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Dependence of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions on primary levels in normal and impaired ears. II. Asymmetry in L1,L2 space. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97:2359–2377, 1995.CrossRefPubMed
Wojtczak M, Oxenham AJ. Pitfalls in behavioral estimates of basilar-membrane compression in humans. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125:270–281, 2009.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Otoacoustic Emission Theories and Behavioral Estimates of Human Basilar Membrane Motion Are Mutually Consistent
Authors
Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda
Peter T. Johannesen
Publication date
01-12-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-009-0176-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2009 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Anatomy of the Distal Incus in Humans

OriginalPaper

On- and Off-Frequency Forward Masking by Schroeder-Phase Complexes

OriginalPaper

Processing Temporal Modulations in Binaural and Monaural Auditory Stimuli by Neurons in the Inferior Colliculus and Auditory Cortex

OriginalPaper

Acoustic Clicks Activate both the Canal and Otolith Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex Pathways in Behaving Monkeys

OriginalPaper

Basilar Membrane Responses to Noise at a Basal Site of the Chinchilla Cochlea: Quasi-Linear Filtering

OriginalPaper

Discrimination of Time-Reversed Harmonic Complexes by Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners