Auditory Cortical Processing in Noise in Normal-Hearing Young Adults

References

• Gott P, Hughes E. Effect of noise masking on the brain-stem and middle-latency auditory evoked potentials: Central and peripheral components. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1989;74:131–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jerger J, Musiek F. Report of the consensus conference on the diagnosis of auditory processing disorders in school-aged children. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000;11:467–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Helfer K, Wilber L. Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. J Speech Hear Res. 1990;33:149–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pekkarinen E, Salmivalli A, Suonpaa J. Effect of noise on word discrimination by subjects with impaired hearing compared with those with normal hearing. Scand Audiol. 1990;19:31–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stach B. Clinical Audiology: An Introduction. San Diego:Singular; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Bamiou DE, Musiek FE, Luxon LM. Aetiology and clinical presentations of auditory processing disorders−a review. Arch Dis Child. 2001;85(5):361–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajan R. Centrifugal pathways protect hearing sensitivity at the cochlea in noisy environments that exacerbate the damage induced by loud sound. J Neurosci. 2000;20(17):6684–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvi RJ, Lockwood AH, Frisina RD, Coad, ML, Wack, DS, & Frisina, DR. PET imaging of the normal human auditory system: responses to speech in quiet and in background noise. Hear Res. 2002;170(1–2):96–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong PC, Uppunda AK, Parrish TB, Dhar S. Cortical mechanisms of speech perception in noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51(4):1026–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott SK, Rosen S, Wickham L, Wise RJ. A positron emission tomography study of the neural basis of informational and energetic masking effects in speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;115(2):813–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killion M, Niquette, P. What can the pure-tone audiogram tell us about a patient's SNR loss?Hear J. 2000;53:46–53.
   Google Scholar
• Kalikow D, Stevens K, Elliot L. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977;61:1337–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killion M, Niquette P, Gudmundsen G. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116:2395–2405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strom K. The HR 2003 dispenser survey. Hear Rev. 2003;10:522–38.
   Google Scholar
• Jerger J, Hayes D. The cross-check principle in pediatric audiometry. Arch Otolaryngol. 1976;102:614–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherg M, von Cramon D. Evoked dipole source potentials of the human auditory cortex. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1986;65:344–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scherg M, Vajar J, Picton T. A source analysis of the late human auditory evoked potentials. J Cogn Neurosci. 1989;1:336–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vaughan H, Ritter W. The sources of auditory evoked responses recorded from the human scalp. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1970;28:360–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C, Bak C, Kofoed B, Lebech J, Saermark K. Auditory magnetic fields from the human cerebral cortex: Location and strength of an equivalent current dipole. Acta Neurol Scand. 1982;65:553–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumann S, Rogers R, Papanicolaou A, Saydjari C. Intersession replicability of dipole parameters in three components of the auditory evoked magnetic field. Brain Topogr. 1990;3:311–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Knight R, Scabini D, Woods D, Clayworth C. The effects of lesions of the superior temporal gyrus and inferior parietal lobe on temporal and vertex components of human AEP. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1988;70:499–509.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rif J, Han R, Hamalainen M, Sams M. Auditory attention affects two different areas in the human supratemporal cortex. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1991;79:464–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richer F, Johnson R, Beatty J. Sources of late components of the brain magnetic response. Abstr Soc Neurosci. 1983;9:656.
   Google Scholar
• Courchesne E. Neurophysiological correlates of cognitive development: Changes in long-latency event-related potentials from childhood to adulthood. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1978;45:468–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Desmedt J, Debecker J. Waveform and neural mechanism of the decision P350 elicited without pre-stimulus CNV or readiness potential in random sequences of near threshold auditory clicks and finger stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1979;47:648–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wood C, Allison T, Goff W, Williamson P, Spencer D. On the neural origin of P300 in man. In: Kornhuber H, Deecke L (editors) Motivation, Motor and Sensory Processes of the Brain: Progress in Brain Research. Amsterdam:Elsevier;1980, p. 51–6.
   Google Scholar
• Yingling C, Hosobuchi Y. A subcortical correlate of P300 in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1984;59:72–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Billings CJ, Tremblay KL, Stecker GC, Tolin WM. Human evoked cortical activity to signal-to-noise ratio and absolute signal level. Hear Res. 2009;254:15–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obert A, Cranford J. Effects of neocortical lesions on the P300 component of the auditory evoked response. Am J Otol. 1990;11:447–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Polich J, Howard L, Starr A. Stimulus frequency and masking as determinants of P300 latency in event-related potentials from auditory stimuli. Biol Psychol. 1985;21:309–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salisbury D, DeSantis M, Shenton M, McCarley R. The effect of background noise on P300 to suprathreshold stimuli. Psychophysiology. 2002;39:111–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carhart R, Jerger J. Preferred method for clinical determination of pure-tone thresholds. J Speech Hear Disord. 1959;16:340–5.
   Google Scholar
• Musiek F, Baran J, Pinheiro M. P300 results in patients with lesions of the auditory areas of the cerebrum. J Am Acad Audiol. 1992;3:5–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weihing J, Musiek F. An electrophysiological measure of binaural hearing in noise. J Am Acad Audiol. 2008;19:481–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jirsa R. The clinical utility of the P3 AERP in children with auditory processing disorders. J Speech Hear Res. 1992;35:903–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pickles J. An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing. New York:Academic Press;1982.
   Google Scholar
• Stapleton J, O'Reilly T, Halgren E. Endogenous potentials evoked in simple cognitive tasks: Scalp topography. Int J Neurosci. 1987;36:75–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton S, Braren M, Zubin J. Evoked-potential correlates to stimulus uncertainty. Science. 1965;150:1187–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polich J. Task difficulty, probability, and inter-stimulus interval as determinants of P300 from auditory stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1987;68:311–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Michalewski H, Prasher D, Starr A. Latency variability and temporal interrelationships of the auditory event-related potentials (N1, P2, N1, and P3) in normal subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1986;65:59–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spongberg T, Decker N. Auditory P3 latency and amplitude: Relationships to earlier exogenous auditory events. Scand Audiol. 1990;19:73–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips D. Neural representation of sound amplitude in the auditory cortex: Effects of noise masking. Behav Brain Res. 1990;37:197–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narayan R, Best V, Ozmeral E, McClaine E, Dent M, Shinn-Cunningham B . Cortical interference effects in the cocktail party problem. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:1601–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, D. Temporal response features of cat auditory cortex neurons contributing to sensitivity to tones delivered in the presence of continuous noise. Hear Res. 1985;19:253–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson R, McArdle R, Smith S. An evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50:844–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman A. Central auditory system plasticity and aural rehabilitation of adults. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42:169–86.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson, R, McArdle, R, Smith, S. An evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res2007;50:844–856.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T, Otis B. Central auditory plasticity: Changes in the N1-P2 complex after speech-sound training. Ear Hear. 2001;22:79–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar