Effects of Stimulus Repetition Rate and Frequency on the Auditory Brainstem Response in Normal, Cochlear-Impaired, and VIII Nerve/Brainstem-Impaired Subjects The effects of signal repetition rate and frequency on the auditory brainstem responses of normal listeners, of persons with cochlear lesions, and of persons with VIII nerve/brainstem lesions were evaluated. The normal group exhibited more waves I and II than did the cochlear and VIII/brainstem groups. The normal and cochlear ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 1983
Effects of Stimulus Repetition Rate and Frequency on the Auditory Brainstem Response in Normal, Cochlear-Impaired, and VIII Nerve/Brainstem-Impaired Subjects
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Cynthia G. Fowler
    VA Medical Center, Long Beach; Universiy of California, Irvine
  • Douglas Noffsinger
    VA Medical Center, West Los Angeles; University of California, Los Angeles
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 1983
Effects of Stimulus Repetition Rate and Frequency on the Auditory Brainstem Response in Normal, Cochlear-Impaired, and VIII Nerve/Brainstem-Impaired Subjects
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1983, Vol. 26, 560-567. doi:10.1044/jshr.2604.560
History: Received April 12, 1982 , Accepted March 15, 1983
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1983, Vol. 26, 560-567. doi:10.1044/jshr.2604.560
History: Received April 12, 1982; Accepted March 15, 1983

The effects of signal repetition rate and frequency on the auditory brainstem responses of normal listeners, of persons with cochlear lesions, and of persons with VIII nerve/brainstem lesions were evaluated. The normal group exhibited more waves I and II than did the cochlear and VIII/brainstem groups. The normal and cochlear groups exhibited more waves III and V than did the VIII nerve/brainstem group. The latency of wave I was not different among groups, whereas wave V was significantly later in the VIII nerve/brainstem group than in the other groups. Waves I, III, and V were later for 50/s than for 10/s. Waves I and III displayed shorter latencies for 4000 Hz than for 2000 Hz, whereas wave V displayed similar latencies for the two stimuli. In conclusion, cochlear pathology (⩽65 dB HL) does not prolong the latencies of waves I and V. A dual mechanism is discussed to explain the rate-dependent latency shift of wave V.

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