Further Validation of Evoked Response Audiometry (ERA) For 162 pupils at Central Institute for the Deaf who had severe hearing impairment but whose thresholds lay within the limits of the audiometric equipment at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz, comparisons were made between the “thresholds” estimated from the vertex (V) potentials, behavioral thresholds using the same audiometric equipment, ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 1967
Further Validation of Evoked Response Audiometry (ERA)
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Hallowell Davis
    Central Institute for the Deaf, St. Louis, Missouri
  • Shirley K. Hirsh
    Central Institute for the Deaf, St. Louis, Missouri
  • Joyce Shelnutt
    Central Institute for the Deaf, St. Louis, Missouri
  • Clyde Bowers
    Central Institute for the Deaf, St. Louis, Missouri
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 1967
Further Validation of Evoked Response Audiometry (ERA)
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1967, Vol. 10, 717-732. doi:10.1044/jshr.1004.717
History: Received January 1, 1967
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1967, Vol. 10, 717-732. doi:10.1044/jshr.1004.717
History: Received January 1, 1967

For 162 pupils at Central Institute for the Deaf who had severe hearing impairment but whose thresholds lay within the limits of the audiometric equipment at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz, comparisons were made between the “thresholds” estimated from the vertex (V) potentials, behavioral thresholds using the same audiometric equipment, and audiograms already on record.

The data for 46 children four to 10 years old tested in 1965–66 did not differ significantly from results previously reported with older children. Average estimates of threshold were in excellent agreement: the difference of means for the groups, V potential vs. behavioral, was 0.1 dB; V potential vs. clinical audiogram, 2.2 dB. The average deviation of estimates for a single trial at one frequency, V potential vs. behavioral, was 7.9 dB.

The children with impairments beyond the limits of the equipment were all identified as having very severe auditory impairment.

The method of average evoked response appears to be completely feasible for passive audiometry of school children four years of age or more.

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