Non-Organic Hearing Loss and the Consistency of Behavioral Auditory Responses The method of limits and the method of constant stimuli were employed to investigate test-retest consistency in behavioral auditory responsivity within 18 normal hearing subjects, 18 subjects with sensory-neural hearing loss and 18 subjects with non-organic hearing loss. A 1 000 cps pure-tone stimulus was used for all measurements. Findings ... Articles
Articles  |   June 1965
Non-Organic Hearing Loss and the Consistency of Behavioral Auditory Responses
 
Author Notes
  • © 1965 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Article Information
Articles   |   June 1965
Non-Organic Hearing Loss and the Consistency of Behavioral Auditory Responses
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 1965, Vol. 8, 149-163. doi:10.1044/jshr.0802.149
History: Received January 29, 1965
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, June 1965, Vol. 8, 149-163. doi:10.1044/jshr.0802.149
History: Received January 29, 1965

The method of limits and the method of constant stimuli were employed to investigate test-retest consistency in behavioral auditory responsivity within 18 normal hearing subjects, 18 subjects with sensory-neural hearing loss and 18 subjects with non-organic hearing loss. A 1 000 cps pure-tone stimulus was used for all measurements. Findings suggest that: (1) individuals with non-organic hearing loss are as consistent as normal hearing subjects and subjects with sensory-neural hearing loss when reproducing pure-tone thresholds measured at 1 000 cps by identical psychophysical methods; (2) response patterns obtained with two procedures utilizing the method of constant stimuli clearly differentiate the performance of subjects with non-organic hearing loss from that of normal hearing subjects and subjects with sensory-neural hearing loss, while the response patterns produced by normal hearing subjects are practically identical to those produced by subjects with sensory-neural hearing loss; (3) “shock threat” included in one procedure employing the method of constant stimuli failed to significantly affect responsivity patterns within either of the three groups.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access