Age-Related Dichotic Listening Skills in Impaired and Non-Impaired Readers: A Comparative Study

Dichotic listening is the high-level auditory process which enables the perception of different verbal stimuli delivered simultaneously to the right and left ears (binaural integration), as well as the perception of a verbal stimulus presented to one ear while ignoring a different stimulus in the other ear (binaural separation). Deficits in central auditory processing have been reported in children with learning disabilities. The present study aimed to compare dichotic listening performances in right-handed impaired readers (IR) and non-impaired readers (non-IR) according to age. For this, a cross-sectional study was conducted in 120 IR (56 males and 64 females) divided into five age groups and 120 non-IR (63 male and 57 female) matched on chronological age (8 to 9 years; 9 to 10 years; 10 to 12 years; 12 to 18 years; adult). They were tested for binaural integration and binaural separation, allowing for the calculation of dichotic aptitude (DA), ear prevalence (EP), and attentional shift index (ASI). A series of ANOVAs showed an effect of age and of the reading group for all the dichotic-related measures, except for EP. Binaural separation scores were lower in IR who also showed more intrusive responses compared to non-IR. These intrusive responses, which were more frequent on the right ear for IR, decreased with age in both groups. Overall, these results suggest that dichotic listening scores improve with age as the central auditory pathways mature. However, whatever the age, performances are lower in IR than in non-IR. This might be explained by an incomplete maturation of the auditory pathways in IR; an early start for long-term follow-up and auditory training is suggested.

Dichotic spectral integration range for consonant recognition in listeners with normal hearing

Dichotic spectral integration range, or DSIR, was measured for consonant recognition with normal-hearing listeners. DSIR is defined as a frequency range needed from 0 to 8,000 Hz band in one ear for consonant recognition when low-frequency information of the same consonant was presented to the opposite ear. DSIR was measured under the three signal processing conditions: (1) unprocessed, (2) target: intensified target spectro-temporal regions by 6 dB responsible for consonant recognition, and (3) target minus conflicting: intensified target regions minus spectro-temporal regions that increase confusion. Each consonant was low-pass filtered with a cutoff frequency of 250, 500, 750, and 1,000 Hz, and then was presented in the left ear or low-frequency (LF) ear. To create dichotic listening, the same consonant was simultaneously presented to the right ear or high-frequency (HF) ear. This was high-pass filtered with an initial cutoff frequency of 7,000 Hz, which was adjusted using an adaptive procedure to find the maximum high-pass cutoff for 99.99% correct consonant recognition. Mean DSIRs spanned from 3,198-8,000 Hz to 4,668-8,000 Hz (i.e., mid-to-high frequencies were unnecessary), depending on low-frequency information in the LF ear. DSIRs narrowed (i.e., required less frequency information) with increasing low-frequency information in the LF ear. However, the mean DSIRs were not significantly affected by the signal processing except at the low-pass cutoff frequency of 250 Hz. The individual consonant analyses revealed that /ta/, /da/, /sa/, and /za/ required the smallest DSIR, while /ka/, /ga/, /fa/, and /va/ required the largest DSIRs. DSIRs also narrowed with increasing low-frequency information for the two signal processing conditions except for 250 vs. 1,000 Hz under the target-conflicting condition. The results suggest that consonant recognition is possible with large amounts of spectral information missing if complementary spectral information is integrated across ears. DSIR is consonant-specific and relatively consistent, regardless of signal processing. The results will help determine the minimum spectral range needed in one ear for consonant recognition if limited low spectral information is available in the opposite ear.

Benefits of Binaural Integration in Cochlear Implant Patients with Single-Sided Deafness and Residual Hearing in the Implanted Ear

The purpose of the study is to gauge the benefits of binaural integration effects (redundancy and squelch) due to preserved low-frequency residual hearing in the implanted ear of cochlear implant users with single-sided deafness. There were 11 cochlear implant users (age 18-61 years old) who had preserved low-frequency hearing in the implanted ear; they had a normal hearing or mild hearing loss in the contralateral ear. Patients were tested with monosyllabic words, under different spatial locations of speech and noise and with the cochlear implant activated and deactivated, in two listening configurations-one in which low frequencies in the implanted ear were masked and another in which they were unmasked. We also investigated how cochlear implant benefit due to binaural integration depended on unaided sound localization ability. Patients benefited from the binaural integration effects of redundancy and squelch only in the unmasked condition. Pearson correlations between binaural integration effects and unaided sound localization error showed significance only for squelch (r = -0.67; p = 0.02). Hearing preservation after cochlear implantation has considerable benefits because the preserved low-frequency hearing in the implanted ear contributes to binaural integration, presumably through the preserved temporal fine structure.

Adverse effects of pesticides on central auditory functions in tobacco growers

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of exposure to pesticides on the central auditory functions (CAF) of Brazilian tobacco growers.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional study carried out between 2010 and 2012. Participants were evaluated with two behavioural procedures to investigate CAF, the random gap detection test (RGDT) and the dichotic digit test in Portuguese (DDT).

STUDY SAMPLE

A total of 22 growers exposed to pesticides (study group) and 21 subjects who were not exposed to pesticides (control group) were selected.

RESULTS

No significant differences between groups were observed for pure-tone thresholds. A significant association between pesticide exposure and the results for RGDT and DDT was found. Significant differences between pesticide-exposed and nonexposed subjects were found for RGDT frequency average and DDT binaural average, when including age and hearing level as covariates. Age was significantly associated with RGDT frequency average, DDT left ear score, DDT binaural average and DDT right ear advantage. Hearing levels were not significantly associated with any of the test scores. The relative risk of failing the DDT and RGDT for the study group was 1.88 (95% CI: 1.10-3.20) and 1.74 (95% CI: 1.06-2.86), respectively, as compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that tobacco growers exposed to pesticides exhibited signs of central auditory dysfunction characterised by decrements in temporal processing and binaural integration processes/abilities.

Two Ears Are Not Always Better than One: Mandatory Vowel Fusion Across Spectrally Mismatched Ears in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Hearing loss and auditory prostheses can alter auditory processing by inducing large pitch mismatches and broad pitch fusion between the two ears. Similar to integration of incongruent inputs in other sensory modalities, the mismatched, fused pitches are often averaged across ears for simple stimuli. Here, we measured parallel effects on complex stimulus integration using a new technique based on vowel classification in five bilateral hearing aid users and eight bimodal cochlear implant users. Continua between five pairs of synthetic vowels were created by varying the first formant spectral peak while keeping the second formant constant. Comparison of binaural and monaural vowel classification functions for each vowel pair continuum enabled visualization of the following frequency-dependent integration trends: (1) similar monaural and binaural functions, (2) ear dominance, (3) binaural averaging, and (4) binaural interference. Hearing aid users showed all trends, while bimodal cochlear implant users showed mostly ear dominance or interference. Interaural pitch mismatches, frequency ranges of binaural pitch fusion, and the relative weightings of pitch averaging across ears were also measured using tone and/or electrode stimulation. The presence of both large interaural pitch mismatches and broad pitch fusion was not sufficient to predict vowel integration trends such as binaural averaging or interference. The way that pitch averaging was weighted between ears also appears to be important for determining binaural vowel integration trends. Abnormally broad spectral fusion and the associated phoneme fusion across mismatched ears may underlie binaural speech perception interference observed in hearing aid and cochlear implant users.

A function for binaural integration in auditory grouping and segregation in the inferior colliculus

Responses of neurons to binaural, harmonic complex stimuli in urethane-anesthetized guinea pig inferior colliculus (IC) are reported. To assess the binaural integration of harmonicity cues for sound segregation and grouping, responses were measured to harmonic complexes with different fundamental frequencies presented to each ear. Simultaneously gated harmonic stimuli with fundamental frequencies of 125 Hz and 145 Hz were presented to the left and right ears, respectively, and recordings made from 96 neurons with characteristic frequencies >2 kHz in the central nucleus of the IC. Of these units, 70 responded continuously throughout the stimulus and were excited by the stimulus at the contralateral ear. The stimulus at the ipsilateral ear excited (EE: 14%; 10/70), inhibited (EI: 33%; 23/70), or had no significant effect (EO: 53%; 37/70), defined by the effect on firing rate. The neurons phase locked to the temporal envelope at each ear to varying degrees depending on signal level. Many of the cells (predominantly EO) were dominated by the response to the contralateral stimulus. Another group (predominantly EI) synchronized to the contralateral stimulus and were suppressed by the ipsilateral stimulus in a phasic manner. A third group synchronized to the stimuli at both ears (predominantly EE). Finally, a group only responded when the waveform peaks from each ear coincided. We conclude that these groups of neurons represent different "streams" of information but exhibit modifications of the response rather than encoding a feature of the stimulus, like pitch.