Modulation Detection Interference in Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing Listeners were asked to detect amplitude modulation (AM) of a target (or signal) carrier that was presented in isolation or in the presence of an additional (masker) carrier. The signal was modulated at a rate of 10 Hz, and the masker was unmodulated or was modulated at a rate of ... Research Article
Research Article  |   April 01, 2002
Modulation Detection Interference in Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sid P. Bacon, PhD
    Psychoacoustics Laboratory Department of Speech and Hearing Science Arizona State University Tempe
  • Jane M. Opie
    Psychoacoustics Laboratory Department of Speech and Hearing Science Arizona State University Tempe
  • Contact author: Sid P. Bacon, PhD, Psychoacoustics Laboratory, Department of Speech and Hearing Science, P.O. Box 871908, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1908. E-mail: spb@asu.edu
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Hearing / Research Articles
Research Article   |   April 01, 2002
Modulation Detection Interference in Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, April 2002, Vol. 45, 392-402. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2002/031)
History: Received May 25, 2001 , Accepted November 29, 2001
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, April 2002, Vol. 45, 392-402. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2002/031)
History: Received May 25, 2001; Accepted November 29, 2001
Web of Science® Times Cited: 9

Listeners were asked to detect amplitude modulation (AM) of a target (or signal) carrier that was presented in isolation or in the presence of an additional (masker) carrier. The signal was modulated at a rate of 10 Hz, and the masker was unmodulated or was modulated at a rate of 2, 10, or 40 Hz. Nine listeners had normal hearing, 4 had a bilateral hearing loss, and 4 had a unilateral hearing loss; those with a unilateral loss were tested in both ears. The listeners with a hearing loss had normal hearing at 1 kHz and a 30- to 40-dB loss at 4 kHz. The carrier frequencies were 984 and 3952 Hz. In one set of conditions, the lower frequency carrier was the signal and the higher frequency carrier was the masker. In the other set, the reverse was true. For the impaired ears, the carriers were presented at 70 dB SPL. For the normal ears, either the carriers were both presented at 70 dB SPL or the higher frequency carrier was reduced to 40 dB SPL to simulate the lower sensation level experienced by the impaired ears. There was considerable individual variability in the results, and there was no clear effect of hearing loss. These results suggest that a mild, presumably cochlear hearing loss does not affect the ability to process AM in one frequency region in the presence of competing AM from another region.

Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by a grant from NIDCD (DC01376). We thank Jodi Hubbartt Winfrey and Catherine Marsh for collecting the data from the individuals with unilateral hearing loss, and for their assistance with “plot.”
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access