First- and second-order modulation detection thresholds were measured in normal hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. 'First-order' modulation detection thresholds correspond to the ability of listeners to detect sinusoidal amplitude modulation (SAM); they are measured as a function of the frequency of that modulation, f(m). 'Second-order' modulation detection thresholds correspond to the ability to detect sinusoidal modulation applied to the modulation depth of a SAM signal; they are measured as a function of the frequency of the modulation applied to the modulation depth (referred to as f(m)'). In this case, the SAM signal acts as a 'carrier' stimulus of frequency f(m) and sinusoidal modulation of the SAM-signal's modulation depth (at rate f(m)') generates two additional components in the modulation spectrum at f(m)-f(m)' and f(m)+f(m)'. In both groups of listeners, first-order modulation detection thresholds were measured for modulation frequencies f(m) ranging between 4 Hz and 32 Hz, and second-order modulation detection thresholds were measured for second-order modulation frequencies f(m)' ranging between 1 Hz and 11 Hz, using a fixed first-order modulation frequency f(m) of 16 Hz. The results showed that, in hearing-impaired listeners: first-order modulation detection thresholds were within the normal range up to f(m) = 16 Hz and poorer than normal at f(m) = 32 Hz; second-order modulation detection thresholds were within the normal range at f(m)' = 3, 5 and 11 Hz, and poorer than normal at f(m)' = 1 Hz and 7 Hz. These results suggest that cochlear damage has little effect on the detection of both sinusoidal and complex temporal envelopes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tandetnik et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: