Auditory steady state responses recorded in multitalker babble

References

• Beattie R.C. 1989. Word recognition functions for the CID W-22 test in multitalker noise for normally hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J Speech Hear Disord, 54, 20–32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bhagat S.P. 2008. The effects of monotic and dichotic interference tones on 40 Hz auditory steady-state responses in normal-hearing adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 19, 101–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carhart R., Tillman T.W. 1970. Interaction of competing speech signals with hearing losses. Arch Otolaryngol, 91, 273–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cone B., Garinis A. 2009. Auditory steady-state responses and speech feature discrimination in infants. Journal of the Academy of Audiology, 20, 629–43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• D'Haenens W., Dhooge I., De Vel E., Maes L., Bockstael A. . 2007. Auditory steady-state responses to MM and exponential envelope AM(2)/FM stimuli in normal-hearing adults. Int J Audiol, 46, 399–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrijevic A., John M.S., Picton T.W. 2004. Auditory steady-state responses and word recognition scores in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired adults. Ear Hear, 25, 68–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrijevic A., John M.S., van Roon P., Picton T.W. 2001. Human auditory steady-state responses to tones independently modulated in both frequency and amplitude. Ear Hear, 22, 100–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Divenyi P.L., Haupt K.M. 1997a. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and lateral asymmetry effects. Ear Hear, 18, 42–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Divenyi P.L., Haupt K.M. 1997b. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. II. Correlation analysis. Ear Hear, 18, 100–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Divenyi P.L., Haupt K.M. 1997c. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. III. Factor representation. Ear Hear, 18, 189–201.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubno J.R., Dirks D.D., Morgan D.E. 1984. Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 76, 87–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggermont J.J. 1994. Temporal modulation transfer functions for AM and FM stimuli in cat auditory cortex. Effects of carrier type, modulating waveform and intensity. Hear Res, 74, 51–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggermont J.J. 1998. Representation of spectral and temporal sound features in three cortical fields of the cat. Similarities outweigh differences. J Neurophysiol, 80, 2743–64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elmasian R., Galambos R. 1975. Loudness enhancement: Monaural, binaural, and dichotic. J Acoust Soc Am, 58, 229–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Field A. 2009. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, Third. London: Sage Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Finney D.J. 1952. Statistical Method in Biological Assay. London: Charles Griffin & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher A.L., Hymel M.R., Cranford J.L., DeChicchis A.R. 2000. Electrophysiologic signs of auditory distraction in elderly listeners. J Am Acad Audiol, 11, 36–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fowler C.G., Mikami C.M. 1992a. Effects of noise bandwidth on the late-potential masking level difference. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 84, 157–63.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fowler C.G., Mikami C.M. 1992b. The late auditory evoked potential masking-level difference as a function of noise level. J Speech Hear Res, 35, 216–21.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fowler C.G., Mikami C.M. 1995. Binaural phase effects in the auditory brainstem response. J Am Acad Audiol, 6, 399–406.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fowler C.G., Mikami C.M. 1996. Phase effects on the middle and late auditory evoked potentials. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 23–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• French N.R., Steinberg J.C. 1947. Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. J Acoust Soc Am, 19, 90–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geisler C.D. 1988. Representation of speech sounds in the auditory nerve. Journal of Phonetics, 16, 19–35.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon-Salant S. 1987. Effects of acoustic modification on consonant recognition by elderly hearing-impaired subjects. J Acoust Soc Am, 81, 1199–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenwood D.D. 1988. Cochlear nonlinearity and gain control as determinants of the response of primary auditory neurons to harmonic complexes. Hear Res, 32, 207–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greenwood D.D, Goldberg J.M. 1970. Response of neurons in the cochlear nuclei to variations in noise bandwidth and to tone-noise combinations. J Acoust Soc Am, 47, 1022–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grose J.H., Eddins D.A., Hall J.W. 3rd. 1989. Gap detection as a function of stimulus bandwidth with fixed high-frequency cutoff in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 86, 1747–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grose J.H., Mamo S.K., Hall J.W. 3rd. 2009. Age effects in temporal envelope processing: Speech unmasking and auditory steady state responses. Ear Hear, 30, 1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harkrider A.W., Plyler P.N., Hedrick M.S. 2009. Effects of hearing loss and spectral shaping on identification and neural response patterns of stop-consonant stimuli in young adults. Ear Hear, 30, 31–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Henry K.R., Price J.M. 1992. Suprathreshold comparisons of derived and enhanced compound action potentials. Hear Res, 63, 90–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdman A.T., Lins O., Van Roon P., Stapells D.R., Scherg M. . 2002. Intracerebral sources of human auditory steady-state responses. Brain Topogr, 15, 69–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsh I.J. 1948. The influence of interaural phase on interaural summation and inhibition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 20, 536–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsh I.J. 1950. Binaural hearing aids: a review of some experiments. J Speech Disord, 15, 114–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Horwitz A.R., Dubno J.R., Ahlstrom J.B. 2002. Recognition of low-pass-filtered consonants in noise with normal and impaired high-frequency hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 409–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John M.S., Dimitrijevic A., van Roon P., Picton T.W. 2001. Multiple auditory steady-state responses to AM and FM stimuli. Audiol Neurootol, 6, 12–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John M.S., Lins O.G, Boucher B.L., Picton T.W. 1998. Multiple auditory steady-state responses (MASTER): Stimulus and recording parameters. Audiology, 37, 59–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• John M.S., Picton T.W. 2000. Human auditory steady-state responses to amplitude-modulated tones: Phase and latency measurements. Hear Res, 141, 57–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John M.S., Purcell D.W., Dimitrijevic A., Picton T.W. 2002. Advantages and caveats when recording steady-state responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli. J Am Acad Audiol, 13, 246–59.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krishna B.S., Semple M.N. 2000. Auditory temporal processing: Responses to sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones in the inferior colliculus. J Neurophysiol, 84, 255–73.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krishnan A. 2002. Human frequency-following responses: Representation of steady-state synthetic vowels. Hear Res, 166, 192–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leigh-Paffenroth E.D., Fowler C.G. 2006. Amplitude-modulated auditory steady-state responses in younger and older listeners. J Am Acad Audiol, 17, 582–97.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levi E.C., Folsom R.C., Dobie R.A. 1993. Amplitude-modulation following response (AMFR): Effects of modulation rate, carrier frequency, age, and state. Hear Res, 68, 42–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lins O.G., Picton P.E., Picton T.W., Champagne S.C., Durieux-Smith A. 1995. Auditory steady-state responses to tones amplitude-modulated at 80–110 Hz. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 3051–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNerney K.M., Burkard R.F. 2010. The effects of a second stimulus on the auditory steady state response (ASSR) from the inferior colliculus of the chinchilla. Int J Audiol, 1–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morse R.P., Evans E.F. 1996. Enhancement of vowel coding for cochlear implants by addition of noise. Nat Med, 2, 928–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen W.O., Noffsinger D., Kurdziel S. 1975. Speech discrimination in quiet and in white noise by patients with peripheral and central lesions. Acta Otolaryngol, 80, 375–382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., Dimitrijevic A., Perez-Abalo M.C., Van Roon P. 2005. Estimating audiometric thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 140–156.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Picton T.W., John M.S., Dimitrijevic A., Purcell D. 2003. Human auditory steady-state responses. Int J Audiol, 42, 177–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., Skinner C.R., Champagne S.C., Kellett A.J., Maiste A.C. 1987. Potentials evoked by the sinusoidal modulation of the amplitude or frequency of a tone. J Acoust Soc Am, 82, 165–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., van Roon P., John M.S. 2007. Human auditory steady-state responses during sweeps of intensity. Ear Hear, 28, 542–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., van Roon P., John M.S. 2009. Multiple auditory steady state responses (80–101 Hz): Effects of ear, gender, handedness, intensity and modulation rate. Ear Hear, 30, 100–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rees A., Green G.G., Kay R.H. 1986. Steady-state evoked responses to sinusoidally amplitude-modulated sounds recorded in man. Hear Res, 23, 123–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhode W.S. 1994. Temporal coding of 200% amplitude modulated signals in the ventral cochlear nucleus of cat. Hear Res, 77, 43–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rhode W.S., Geisler C.D., Kennedy D.T. 1978. Auditory nerve fiber response to wide-band noise and tone combinations. J Neurophysiol, 41, 692–704.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roup C.M., Wiley T.L., Safady S.H., Stoppenbach D.T. 1998. Tympanometric screening norms for adults. American Journal of Audiology, 7, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Ruggero M.A., Rich N.C. 1991. Furosemide alters organ of corti mechanics: Evidence for feedback of outer hair cells upon the basilar membrane. J Neurosci, 11, 1057–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seluakumaran K., Mulders W.H., Robertson D. 2008. Unmasking effects of olivocochlear efferent activation on responses of inferior colliculus neurons. Hear Res, 243, 35–46.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Snell K.B., Frisina D.R. 2000. Relationships among age-related differences in gap detection and word recognition. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 1615–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza P.E., Turner C.W. 1994. Masking of speech in young and elderly listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res, 37, 655–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sperry J.L., Wiley T.L., Chial M.R. 1997. Word recognition performance in various background competitors. J Am Acad Audiol, 8, 71–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steinhauer K. 2003. Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain Lang, 86, 142–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tillman T.W., Carhart R. 1966. An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. SAM-TR-66-55. Tech Rep SAM-TR, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Tremblay K.L., Billings C., Rohila N. 2004. Speech evoked cortical potentials: Effects of age and stimulus presentation rate. J Am Acad Audiol, 15, 226–37; quiz 64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang J., Nicol T., Skoe E., Sams M., Kraus N. 2009. Emotion modulates early auditory response to speech. J Cogn Neurosci, 21, 2121–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weihing J., Musiek F.E. 2008. An electrophysiological measure of binaural hearing in noise. J Am Acad Audiol, 19, 481–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiley T.L., Cruickshanks K.J., Nondahl D.M., Tweed T.S., Klein R. . 1996. Tympanometric measures in older adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 260–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson R.H. 2003. Development of a speech-in-multitalker-babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance. J Am Acad Audiol, 14, 453–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson R.H., McArdle R. 2005. Speech signals used to evaluate functional status of the auditory system. J Rehabil Res Dev, 42, 79–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson R.H., McArdle R. 2007. Intra- and inter-session test, retest reliability of the Words-in-Noise (WIN) test. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 813–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wingfield A. 1996. Cognitive factors in auditory performance: Context, speed of processing, and constraints of memory. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 175–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yin S.K., Feng Y.M., Chen Z.N., Wang J. 2008. The effect of noise-induced sloping high-frequency hearing loss on the gap-response in the inferior colliculus and auditory cortex of guinea pigs. Hear Res, 239, 126–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwislocki J.J., Pirodda E., Rubin H. 1959. On some poststimulatory effects at the threshold of audibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 31, 9–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar