Relations among Auditory Brainstem and Middle Latency Response Measures, Categorical Loudness Judgments, and Their Associated Physical Intensities

Abstract

This study characterizes changes in response properties of toneburst-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and/or middle latency responses (MLRs) as a function of perceived loudness and physical intensity of these stimuli and delineates the range of levels corresponding to categorical loudness judgments for these stimuli. ABRs/MLRs were recorded simultaneously to 500- and 2,000-Hz tonebursts in 10 normal-hearing adults at levels corresponding to each listener's loudness judgments for four categories on Contour Test of Loudness. Group mean ABR wave V and MLR wave Pa latency values increased significantly as loudness judgments decreased. Group mean amplitude values for ABR wave V-V′ and MLR wave Na-Pa increased as the listeners' categorical judgments increased. Listeners assigned a broad range (30 to 40 dB) of stimulus intensities when judging loudness of these stimuli within a specific loudness category. This was true for all four loudness categories and both frequencies. Thus, it appears that tone-evoked ABR/MLR response measures reflect, in part, the listener's perception of loudness. Response latencies are a more sensitive indicator of listener's loudness percept than corresponding response amplitudes. An appreciable range of signal levels was judged to be categorically equivalent across listeners. Thus, limiting how loudness judgments can be applied to prescriptive hearing aid fittings in individuals who cannot provide accurate loudness judgments.

Keywords

Auditory evoked potentials - and categorical loudness judgments

• References

• 1 Mueller GH, Hall JW. Hearing aids: fitting and verification. In: Mueller GH, Hall JW, , eds. Audiologist's Desk Reference, Volume II. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group; 1998: 165-182
• 2 Dillon H, Chew R, Deans M. Loudness discomfort level measurements and their implications for the design and fitting of hearing aids. Aust J Audiol 1984; 6: 73-79
• 3 McCandless GA, Miller DL. Loudness discomfort and hearing aids. National Hearing Aid Journal 1972; 1: 28-32
• 4 Stephens SDG, Blegvad B, Krogh HJ. The value of some suprathreshold auditory measures. Scand Audiol 1977; 6 (4) 213-221
• 5 McLeod HL, Greenberg HJ. Relationship between loudness discomfort level and acoustic reflex threshold for normal and sensorineural hearing-impaired individuals. J Speech Hear Res 1979; 22 (4) 873-883
• 6 Margolis RH, Popelka GR. Loudness and the acoustic reflex. J Acoust Soc Am 1975; 58 (6) 1330-1332
• 7 Forquer BD. The stability of and the relation between the acoustic reflex and uncomfortable loudness levels. J Am Aud Soc 1979; 5 (2) 55-59
• 8 Morgan DE, Dirks DD, Bower D, Kamm CA. Loudness discomfort level and acoustic reflex threshold for speech stimuli. J Speech Hear Res 1979; 22 (4) 849-861
• 9 Ritter R, Johnson RM, Northern JL. The controversial relationship between loudness discomfort levels and acoustic reflex thresholds. J Am Audiol Soc 1979; 4 (4) 123-131
• 10 Greenfield DG, Wiley TL, Block MG. Acoustic-reflex dynamics and the loudness-discomfort level. J Speech Hear Disord 1985; 50 (1) 14-20
• 11 Munro KJ, Blount J. Adaptive plasticity in brainstem of adult listeners following earplug-induced deprivation. J Acoust Soc Am 2009; 126 (2) 568-571
• 12 Madell JR, Goldstein R. Relation between loudness and the amplitude of the early components of the averaged electroencephalic response. J Speech Hear Res 1972; 15 (1) 134-141
• 13 Pratt H, Sohmer H. Correlations between psychophysical magnitude estimates and simultaneously obtained auditory nerve, brain stem and cortical responses to click stimuli in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1977; 43 (6) 802-812
• 14 Wilson KG, Stelmack RM. Power functions of loudness magnitude estimations and auditory brainstem evoked responses. Percept Psychophys 1982; 31 (6) 561-565
• 15 Kiessling J. Hearing aid selection by brainstem audiometry. Scand Audiol 1982; 11 (4) 269-275
• 16 Howe SW, Decker TN. Monaural and binaural auditory brainstem responses in relation to the psychophysical loudness growth function. J Acoust Soc Am 1984; 76 (3) 787-793
• 17 Darling RM, Price LL. Loudness and auditory brain stem evoked response. Ear Hear 1990; 11 (4) 289-295
• 18 Davidson SA, Wall LG, Goodman CM. Preliminary studies on the use of an ABR amplitude projection procedure for hearing aid selection. Ear Hear 1990; 11 (5) 332-339
• 19 Serpanos YC. ABR and DPOAE indices of normal loudness in children and adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2004; 15 (8) 555-565
• 20 Nousak JMK. Loudness and the auditory brainstem and middle latency responses (Ph.D. dissertation). New York, NY: University of New York; 2001
• 21 Serpanos YC, O'Malley H, Gravel JS. The relationship between loudness intensity functions and the click-ABR wave V latency. Ear Hear 1997; 18 (5) 409-419
• 22 Silva I, Epstein M. Estimating loudness growth from tone-burst evoked responses. J Acoust Soc Am 2010; 127 (6) 3629-3642
• 23 Cox RM, Alexander GC, Taylor IM, Gray GA. The contour test of loudness perception. Ear Hear 1997; 18 (5) 388-400
• 24 Beattie RC, Svihovec DA, Carmen RE, Kunkel HA. Loudness discomfort level for speech: comparison of two instructional sets for saturation sound pressure level selection. Ear Hear 1980; 1 (4) 197-205
• 25 Skinner MW. Determining an individual's auditory area. In: Remediation of Communication Disorders. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1988: 118-148
• 26 Sammeth CA, Birman M, Hecox KE. Variability of most comfortable and uncomfortable loudness levels to speech stimuli in the hearing impaired. Ear Hear 1989; 10 (2) 94-100
• 27 Florentine M, Buus S, Poulsen T. Temporal integration of loudness as a function of level. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99 (3) 1633-1644
• 28 Jenstad LM, Cornelisse LE, Seewald RC. Effects of test procedure on individual loudness functions. Ear Hear 1997; 18 (5) 401-408
• 29 Sherlock LP, Formby C. Estimates of loudness, loudness discomfort, and the auditory dynamic range: normative estimates, comparison of procedures, and test-retest reliability. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (2) 85-100
• 30 Formby C, Hawley M, Sherlock L , et al. A sound therapy-based intervention to expand the auditory dynamic range for loudness among persons with sensorineural hearing losses: a randomized placebo controlled clinical trial. Semin Hear 2015; 36 (2) 77-110
• 31 Hawley M, LaGuinn S, Formby C. Intra- and intersubject variability in audiometric measures and loudness judgments in older listeners with normal hearing. Semin Hear 2017; 38 (1) 3-25
• 32 Stapells DR, Picton TW. Technical aspects of brainstem evoked potential audiometry using tones. Ear Hear 1981; 2 (1) 20-29
• 33 Nousak JM, Stapells DR. Frequency specificity of the auditory brain stem response to bone-conducted tones in infants and adults. Ear Hear 1992; 13 (2) 87-95
• 34 Oates P, Stapells DR. Frequency specificity of the human auditory brainstem and middle latency responses to brief tones. II. Derived response analyses. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 102 (6) 3609-3619
• 35 Rosenthal R, Rosnow RL. Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1991
• 36 Hall JW. eHandbook of Auditory Evoked Responses. Amazon Digital Services; 2015
• 37 Pratt H. Middle-latency responses. In: Burkhard RF, Don M, Eggermont JJ, , eds. Auditory Evoked Potentials: Basic Principles and Clinical Application. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007: 463-481
• 38 Picton TW. Human Auditory Evoked Potentials. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing Inc.; 2011
• 39 Kamm C, Dirks DD, Mickey MR. Effect of sensorineural hearing loss on loudness discomfort level and most comfortable loudness judgments. J Speech Hear Res 1978; 21 (4) 668-681
• 40 Valente M, Potts LG, Valente M. Differences and intersubject variability of loudness discomfort levels measured in sound pressure level and hearing level for TDH-50P and ER-3A earphones. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 8 (1) 59-67
• 41 Valente DL, Joshi SN, Jesteadt W. Temporal integration of loudness measured using categorical loudness scaling and matching procedures. J Acoust Soc Am 2011; 130 (1) EL32-EL37
• 42 Oates P, Stapells DR. Auditory brainstem response estimates of the pure tone audiogram: Current status. Semin Hear 1998; 19 (1) 61-85
• 43 Beattie RC, Boyd RL. Early/middle evoked potentials to tonebursts in quiet, white noise and notched noise. Audiology 1985; 24 (6) 406-419
• 44 Hoppe U, Rosanowski F, Iro H, Eysholdt U. Loudness perception and late auditory evoked potentials in adult cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol 2001; 30: 119-125
• 45 Menard M, Gallego S, Berger-Vacon C, Collet L, Thai-Van H. Relationship between loudness growth function and auditory steady-state response in normal-hearing subjects. Hearing Research 2008; 235 (1-2): 105-113
• 46 Suzuki T, Hirai Y, Horiuchi K. Auditory brainstem responses to pure tone stimuli. Scand Audiol 1977; 6: 51-56