Homo- and Anti-phasic Stimulation in ABR

References

• Borg E. 1973. On the neuronal organization of the acoustic middle ear reflex. A physiological and anatomical study. Brain Res 1973; 49: 101–123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borg E, Löfqvist L. Auditory brainstem response (ABR) to rarefaction and condensation clicks in normal and abnormal ears. Scand Audiol 1982; 11: 227–235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler R A, Kluskens L. The influence of phase inversion on the auditory evoked response. Audiology 1971; 10: 353–357
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caird D, Klinke R. Processing of binaural stimuli by cat superior olivary complex neurons. Exp Brain Res 1983; 52: 385–399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coats A C., Martin J L, Kidder H R. Normal short-latency electrophysiological filtered click responses recorded from vertex and external auditory meatus. J Acoust Soc Am 1979; 65: 747–758
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crossman E R, Szafram J. Changes with age in the speed of information intake and discrimination. Experientia 1956; 128, (Suppl 4)
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Diercks K J, Jeffress L A. Interaural phase and the absolute threshold for tone. J Acoust Soc Am 1962; 34: 981–984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobie R A, Berlin C I. Binaural interaction in brainstem-evoked responses. Arch Otolaryngol 1979; 105: 391–398
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fcx J. 1962. Auditory activity in centrifugal and centripetal cochlear fibers in eat. Acta Physiol Scand 1962; 55(Suppl 189)5–68
   Google Scholar
• Folsom R C, Owsley R M. N1 action potentials in humans. Influence of simultaneous contralateral stimulation. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1987; 103: 262–265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fullerton B C, Levine R A, Hosford-Dunn H L, Kiang N YS. Comparison of cat and human brain-stem auditory evoked potentials. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1987; 66: 547–570
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hall J W, III, Derlacki E L. Effect of conductive hearing loss and middle ear surgery on binaural hearing. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986; 95: 525–530
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannley M, Jerger J F, Rivera V M. Relationships among auditory brainstem responses, masking level differences, and the acoustic reflex in multiple sclerosis. Audiology 1983; 22: 20–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hausler R, Levine R A. Brainstem auditory evoked potentials are related to interaural time discrimination in patients with multiple sclerosis. Brain Res 1980; 191: 589–594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde M L, Stephens S DG, Thornton A RD. Stimulus repetition rate and the early brainstem responses. Br J Audiol 1976; 10: 41–50
   Google Scholar
• Kevanishvili Z. Consideration of the sources of the human brainstem auditory evoked potential on the basis of bilateral asymmetry of its parameters. Scand Audiol 1981; 10: 197–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kevanishvili Z, Lagidze Z. Masking level differences: An electrophysiological approach. Scand Audiol 1987; 16: 3–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine R. Binaural interaction in brainstem potentials of human subjects. Ann Neurol 1981; 9: 384–393
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn G E, Gilroy J, Taylor I C, Leiser R P. Binaural masking-level differences in neurological disorders. Arch Otolaryngol 1981; 107: 257–362
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mast T E. Dorsal cochlear nucleus of the chinchilla: Excitation by contralateral sound. Brain Res 1973; 62: 61–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matathias O, Sohmer H, Biton V. Central auditory tests and auditory nerve-brainstem evoked responses in multiple sclerosis. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1985; 99: 369–376
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFadden D. Masking-level differences determined with and without interaural disparities in masker intensity. J Acoust Soc Am 1968; 44: 212–223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michalewski H J, Thompson L W, Patterson J V, Bowman T E, Litzelman D. Sex differences in the amplitudes and latencies of the human auditory brain stem potential. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1980; 48: 351–356
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Møller K, Blegvad B. Brainstem responses in patients with sensorineural hearing loss: Monaural versus binaural stimulation. The significance of the audiogram configuration. Scand Audiol 1976; 5: 115–127
   Google Scholar
• Moore J K. The human auditory brainstem: A comparative view. Hear Res 1987; 29: 33–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moushegian G, Rupert A L, Langford T L. Stimulus coding by medial superior olivary neurons. J Neurophysiol 1967; 30: 1239–1261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noffsinger D. Clinical applications of selected binaural effects. Scand Audiol 1982; 157–165, (Suppl 15)
   Google Scholar
• Noffsinger D, Martinez C D, Schaefer A B. Auditory brainstem responses and masking level differences from persons with brainstem lesions. Scand Audiol 1982; 81–93, (Suppl 15)
   Google Scholar
• Novak R E, Anderson C V. Differentiation of types of presbycusis using the masking-level difference. J Speech Hear Res 1982; 25: 504–508
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olsen W O, Noffsinger D, Carhart R. Masking level differences encountered in clinical populations. Audiology 1976; 15: 287–301
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Prasher D K, Gibson W PR. Paradoxical reduction in AP amplitude on binaural stimulation. Nodar RH, Barber C. Evoked potentials. II. The second international evoked potentials symposium. Butterworth Publishers, Boston 1984; 157–162
   Google Scholar
• Quaranta A, Mininni F, Longo G. ABR in multiple sclerosis. Ipsi-versus contralateral derivation. Scand Audiol 1986; 15: 125–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawool V, Zerlin S. Phase-intensity effects on the ABR. Scand Audiol 1988; 17: 117–123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid A, Thornton A RD. The effects of contralateral masking upon brainstem electric responses. Br J Audiol 1983; 17: 155–162
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salamy A, Birtley Fenn C, Bronshvag M. Ontogenesis of human brainstem evoked potential amplitude. Developmental Psychobiology 1979; 12: 519–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens S DG, Thornton A RD. Subjective and electrophysiologic tests in brain-stem lesions. Arch Otolaryngol 1976; 102: 608–613
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockard J J, Stockard J E, Sharbrough F W. Nonpathologic factors influencing brainstem auditory evoked potentials. Am J of EEG Tech 1978; 18: 177–209
   Google Scholar
• Talland G A. Human aging and behavior. Academic Press, New York & London 1968
   Google Scholar
• Tanis D C, Teas D C. Evoked potential correlates of interaural phase reversals. Audiology 1974; 13: 357–365
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wada S-I, Starr A. Generation of auditory brainstem responses (ABRs). II. Effects of surgical section of the trapezoid body on the ABR in guinea pigs and cat. Electroenceph & Clin Neurophysiol 1983; 56: 340–351
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walsh E J, McGee J. The development of function in the auditory periphery. Neurobiology of hearing: The cochlea, R A Altschuler, D W Hoffman. Raven Press, New York 1986; 247–269
   Google Scholar
• Wrege K S, Starr A. Binaural interaction in human auditory brainstem evoked potentials. Arch Neurol 1981; 38: 572–580
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yonovitz A, Thompson C L, Lozar J. Masking level differences: Auditory evoked responses with homophasic and antiphasic signal and noise. J Speech Hear Res 1979; 22: 403–411
   PubMedGoogle Scholar