Effects of Stimulus Phase on the Normal Auditory Brainstem Response The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effects of stimulus phase on the latencies and morphology of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) of normal-hearing subjects. Although click stimuli produced equivalent ABR latencies for the rarefaction and condensation phases, the subtraction of the waveforms from the two phases yielded ... Research Article
Research Article  |   February 01, 1992
Effects of Stimulus Phase on the Normal Auditory Brainstem Response
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Cynthia G. Fowler
    VA Medical Center, Long Beach, California, and University of California, Irvine
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Hearing / Research Articles
Research Article   |   February 01, 1992
Effects of Stimulus Phase on the Normal Auditory Brainstem Response
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 1992, Vol. 35, 167-174. doi:10.1044/jshr.3501.167
History: Received January 22, 1991 , Accepted April 24, 1991
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 1992, Vol. 35, 167-174. doi:10.1044/jshr.3501.167
History: Received January 22, 1991; Accepted April 24, 1991

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effects of stimulus phase on the latencies and morphology of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) of normal-hearing subjects. Although click stimuli produced equivalent ABR latencies for the rarefaction and condensation phases, the subtraction of the waveforms from the two phases yielded a difference potential. Tone pip stimuli produced polarity differences that were inversely related to stimulus frequency: the higher the frequency, the smaller the ABR latency differences between responses to rarefaction and condensation stimuli, and the smaller the difference potentials. Thus, whereas the latency of click-evoked ABR is dominated by high-frequency responses with equivalent latencies regardless of stimulus phase, low-frequency responses contribute to the overall morphology of the ABR that yields the phasic difference potential. The implications of these findings are discussed with reference to subjects with high-frequency hearing losses.

Acknowledgments
Support for this project was provided by the Medical Research Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC. The author wishes to thank Charlene Mikami and Marian Swanson for assistance in data collection, and Richard Wilson and associate editor Michael Gorga for comments on the manuscript. Portions of this paper were presented at the 1985 (tone pips) and 1990 (clicks) American Speech-Language-Hearing Association meetings.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access