loudness perception

Summary

Summary: The perceived attribute of a sound which corresponds to the physical attribute of intensity.

Top Publications

  1. Wallhäusser Franke E, Brade J, Balkenhol T, D Amelio R, Seegmüller A, Delb W. Tinnitus: distinguishing between subjectively perceived loudness and tinnitus-related distress. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e34583 pubmed publisher
    ..If levels of depressivity, anxiety or somatic symptom severity are severe, therapies and further diagnosis should focus on these symptoms at first. ..
  2. Jaworska N, Blier P, Fusee W, Knott V. Scalp- and sLORETA-derived loudness dependence of auditory evoked potentials (LDAEPs) in unmedicated depressed males and females and healthy controls. Clin Neurophysiol. 2012;123:1769-78 pubmed publisher
    ..Inverse relationships between LDAEPs and clinical scores may be related to treatment history, personality and/or MDD features. MDD was not associated with an altered LDAEP, though subtle AEPs alterations were noted in MDD. ..
  3. Dai H, Micheyl C. On the choice of adequate randomization ranges for limiting the use of unwanted cues in same-different, dual-pair, and oddity tasks. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010;72:538-47 pubmed publisher
    ..In this article, we provide figures and tables that can be used to select randomization ranges that are better suited to experiments involving a same-different, dual-pair, or oddity task. ..
  4. Hitz K, Heekeren K, Obermann C, Huber T, Juckel G, Kawohl W. Examination of the effect of acute levodopa administration on the loudness dependence of auditory evoked potentials (LDAEP) in humans. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2012;221:389-96 pubmed publisher
    ..966 in the verum group and 0.759 in the placebo group, respectively. The administration of levodopa showed no effect on the LDAEP. These findings are in line with other trials using dopamine receptor agonists. ..
  5. May B, Little N, Saylor S. Loudness perception in the domestic cat: reaction time estimates of equal loudness contours and recruitment effects. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2009;10:295-308 pubmed publisher
    ..At present, there are no published descriptions of loudness perception in this species...
  6. Simmons J, Nathan P, Berger G, Allen N. Chronic modulation of serotonergic neurotransmission with sertraline attenuates the loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential in healthy participants. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011;217:101-10 pubmed publisher
    ..The findings from this study together with previous studies suggest that the LDAEP may be a more sensitive marker of long-term or chronic rather than acute changes in the serotonin system. ..
  7. Oberfeld D, Plank T. The temporal weighting of loudness: effects of the level profile. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011;73:189-208 pubmed publisher
    ..The results are interpreted in terms of memory and attention processes. We demonstrate that the prediction of loudness can be improved significantly by allowing for nonuniform temporal weights. ..
  8. Botros A, Psarros C. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: I. The relevance of ECAP threshold profiles and scaled profiles to cochlear implant fitting. Ear Hear. 2010;31:367-79 pubmed publisher
    ..The scaled ECAP threshold profile method provides a clinically significant enhancement to ECAP-based fitting methods, confirming the value of the ECAP threshold profile to cochlear implant fitting. ..
  9. Macherey O, Carlyon R. Temporal pitch percepts elicited by dual-channel stimulation of a cochlear implant. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010;127:339-49 pubmed publisher
    ..These results suggest that there may be more independence between CI channels than previously thought. ..

More Information

Publications62

  1. Battmer R, Dillier N, Lai W, Begall K, Leypon E, González J, et al. Speech perception performance as a function of stimulus pulse rate and processing strategy preference for the Cochlear Nucleus CI24RE device: relation to perceptual threshold and loudness comfort profiles. Int J Audiol. 2010;49:657-66 pubmed publisher
    ..However, there were no significant differences between the word scores across subjects if collected at the individually preferred pulse rate. High pulse rates were preferred when the post-implantation threshold was low. ..
  2. Wesarg T, Battmer R, Garrido L, Dillier N, Garcia Ibanez L, Hey M, et al. Effect of changing pulse rate on profile parameters of perceptual thresholds and loudness comfort levels and relation to ECAP thresholds in recipients of the Nucleus CI24RE device. Int J Audiol. 2010;49:775-87 pubmed publisher
    ..When increasing stimulus rate one should take into account that this requires higher pulse charges per second and more power consumption. ..
  3. Bauer C, Brozoski T. Effect of tinnitus retraining therapy on the loudness and annoyance of tinnitus: a controlled trial. Ear Hear. 2011;32:145-55 pubmed publisher
    ..The global improvement in tinnitus handicap with TRT accrues over an 18-mo period and seems to be a robust and clinically significant effect. ..
  4. Park Y, Lee S, Kim S, Bae S. The loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential (LDAEP) in schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and healthy controls. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2010;34:313-6 pubmed publisher
    ..Studies controlled for psychotropic medication, menstruation cycle, and smoking are needed. ..
  5. Carlyon R, Lynch C, Deeks J. Effect of stimulus level and place of stimulation on temporal pitch perception by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010;127:2997-3008 pubmed publisher
    ..It is concluded that small level differences can have a robust and substantial effect on pitch judgments and argue that these effects are not entirely due to response biases or to co-variation of place-of-excitation with level. ..
  6. Hagenmuller F, Hitz K, Darvas F, Kawohl W. Determination of the loudness dependence of auditory evoked potentials: single-electrode estimation versus dipole source analysis. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2011;26:147-54 pubmed publisher
    ..The single-electrode approach cannot be equated with DSA in the determination of the LDAEP. This should be considered when comparing the results of different LDAEP studies using only one of these methods. ..
  7. Oliva J, Leung S, Croft R, O Neill B, Stout J, Nathan P. Evidence for sex differences in the loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential in humans. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2011;26:172-6 pubmed publisher
  8. Heeren W, Rennies J, Verhey J. Spectral loudness summation of nonsimultaneous tone pulses. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011;130:3905-15 pubmed publisher
    ..The data are discussed in the light of repetition-rate dependent spectral loudness summation and effects of persistence of specific loudness after tone-pulse offset. ..
  9. Finley C, Holden T, Holden L, Whiting B, Chole R, Neely G, et al. Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol. 2008;29:920-8 pubmed publisher
    ..Suboptimal cochlear implant (CI) electrode array placement may reduce presentation of coded information to the central nervous system and, consequently, limit speech recognition...
  10. Dittrich K, Oberfeld D. A comparison of the temporal weighting of annoyance and loudness. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009;126:3168-78 pubmed publisher
    ..Noises with the same L(eq) but different amplitude modulation depths were judged to differ in annoyance but not in loudness. ..
  11. McKay C, Henshall K. Amplitude modulation and loudness in cochlear implantees. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2010;11:101-11 pubmed publisher
    ..We show that several previously published results regarding the effect of carrier rate and added noise on modulation detection could be reinterpreted in the light of these findings. ..
  12. Park Y, Kim D, Kim S, Im C, Lee S. The loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential (LDAEP) as a predictor of the response to escitalopram in patients with generalized anxiety disorder. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011;213:625-32 pubmed publisher
    ..Measurement of the LDAEP appears to provide useful clinical information for predicting treatment responses in patients with GAD. ..
  13. Galvin J, Fu Q. Influence of stimulation rate and loudness growth on modulation detection and intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users. Hear Res. 2009;250:46-54 pubmed publisher
    ..In general, high stimulation rates provided no advantage in intensity resolution and a disadvantage in modulation sensitivity. ..
  14. Saoji A, Litvak L. Use of "phantom electrode" technique to extend the range of pitches available through a cochlear implant. Ear Hear. 2010;31:693-701 pubmed publisher
    ..PE stimulation can elicit pitch percepts lower than that of the most apical MP electrode; the PE pitch is lower by the equivalent of 0.5 to 2 MP electrodes. ..
  15. Lee I, Yang Y, Chen P, Huang H, Yeh T, Lu R, et al. Loudness dependence of auditory evoked potentials (LDAEP) correlates with the availability of dopamine transporters and serotonin transporters in healthy volunteers-a two isotopes SPECT study. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011;214:617-24 pubmed publisher
    ..Our findings provide further evidence for the possible involvement of dopamine and serotonins in the genesis of LDAEP. ..
  16. Chatterjee M, Oberzut C. Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011;130:1567-80 pubmed publisher
    ..Overall, results indicated that intensity cues did not play an important role in temporal envelope processing by the average CI listener. ..
  17. Min J, Lee S, Lee S, Chae J, Lee C, Park Y, et al. Clinical characteristics associated with different strengths of loudness dependence of auditory evoked potentials (LDAEP) in major depressive disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2012;200:374-81 pubmed publisher
    ..These variables need to be considered when interpreting the LDAEP. ..
  18. Garadat S, Pfingst B. Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users. Hear Res. 2011;275:130-8 pubmed publisher
    ..These results suggest that loudness is a contributing factor to across-site variation in GDTs and that CI fittings based on more detailed loudness matching could reduce across-site variation and improve perceptual acuity...
  19. Rennies J, Verhey J. Temporal weighting in loudness of broadband and narrowband signals. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009;126:951-4 pubmed publisher
    ..The first 100 ms contributed significantly more than later segments to overall loudness perception in the broadband condition...
  20. Siegel E, Stefanucci J. A little bit louder now: negative affect increases perceived loudness. Emotion. 2011;11:1006-11 pubmed publisher
    ..This research shows for the first time that the role of affect in perceptual processes may be more pervasive than previously considered. ..
  21. Oberfeld D. The mid-difference hump in forward-masked intensity discrimination. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008;123:1571-81 pubmed publisher
    ..The correlation between loudness changes and DL elevations was significant, but several aspects of the data are incompatible with the predicted one-on-one relation between the two effects. ..
  22. Pedersen B, Ellermeier W. Temporal weights in the level discrimination of time-varying sounds. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008;123:963-72 pubmed publisher
    ..These findings are not accounted for by current models of loudness or intensity discrimination, but are consistent with the idea that temporal weighting in loudness judgments is driven by salient events. ..
  23. Stecker G, Hafter E. Temporal weighting in sound localization. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;112:1046-57 pubmed
    ..Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 806-812 (1990)]. ..
  24. Juckel G, Gallinat J, Riedel M, Sokullu S, Schulz C, Moller H, et al. Serotonergic dysfunction in schizophrenia assessed by the loudness dependence measure of primary auditory cortex evoked activity. Schizophr Res. 2003;64:115-24 pubmed
    ..These results suggest that the loudness dependence of primary auditory cortex evoked activity is well suitable to assess serotonergic dysfunction in schizophrenia. ..
  25. Anweiler A, Verhey J. Spectral loudness summation for short and long signals as a function of level. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006;119:2919-28 pubmed
    ..This is in contrast to the predictions of the ELRH. However, the data at moderate levels are consistent with the expectations of a modified ELRH which assumes a smaller loudness ratio for broadband than for narrow-band signals. ..
  26. Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon R, Deeks J, Wouters J. Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2006;7:253-66 pubmed
    ..These reductions, which were predicted by a simple linear filter model, might lead to considerable power savings if implemented in a cochlear implant speech processor. ..
  27. Gani M, Valentini G, Sigrist A, Kos M, Boex C. Implications of deep electrode insertion on cochlear implant fitting. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2007;8:69-83 pubmed
  28. Berglund B, Hassmen P, Job R. Sources and effects of low-frequency noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;99:2985-3002 pubmed
    ..Research needs and policy decisions, based on what is currently known, are considered. ..
  29. McDermott H, Lech M, Kornblum M, Irvine D. Loudness perception and frequency discrimination in subjects with steeply sloping hearing loss: possible correlates of neural plasticity. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998;104:2314-25 pubmed
    ..The loudness data are generally consistent with recent models that describe loudness perception in terms of peripheral excitation patterns that are presumably restricted by a steeply sloping hearing loss...
  30. Verhey J, Kollmeier B. Spectral loudness summation as a function of duration. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;111:1349-58 pubmed
    ..Alternatively, if a fixed loudness ratio between signals of different duration is assumed, this loudness ratio should depend on the signal spectrum. ..
  31. Parker S, Murphy D, Schneider B. Top-down gain control in the auditory system: evidence from identification and discrimination experiments. Percept Psychophys. 2002;64:598-615 pubmed
    ..The identification data were well described by a signal-detection model using equal-variance Laplace distributions instead of the usual Gaussian distributions. ..
  32. Meerton L, Andrews P, Upile T, Drenovak M, Graham J. A prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating alcohol on loudness perception in cochlear implant users. Clin Otolaryngol. 2005;30:328-32 pubmed
    ..0001 using paired t-test analysis). This effect is likely to be the result of change in the auditory pathways proximal to the cochlea. ..
  33. Linka T, Sartory G, Bender S, Gastpar M, Müller B. The intensity dependence of auditory ERP components in unmedicated patients with major depression and healthy controls. An analysis of group differences. J Affect Disord. 2007;103:139-45 pubmed
    ..This result suggests that specific alterations of the IDAP are not to be expected in major depression in general, these may be confined to subgroups of depressed patients. ..
  34. Oberfeld D. Loudness changes induced by a proximal sound: loudness enhancement, loudness recalibration, or both?. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;121:2137-48 pubmed
    ..The faster-decaying process causing loudness enhancement or loudness decrement has the strongest effect at a masker-target level difference of approximately 30 dB. A model explaining this mid-difference hump is proposed. ..
  35. Juckel G, Gudlowski Y, Müller D, Ozgurdal S, Brune M, Gallinat J, et al. Loudness dependence of the auditory evoked N1/P2 component as an indicator of serotonergic dysfunction in patients with schizophrenia--a replication study. Psychiatry Res. 2008;158:79-82 pubmed
    ..Thus, we were able again to demonstrate electrophysiological evidence for an upregulated serotonergic system in schizophrenia. ..
  36. Hiller W, Goebel G. Factors influencing tinnitus loudness and annoyance. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;132:1323-30 pubmed
    ..91 vs 9.47). Several clinical factors of tinnitus influence perceived loudness and annoyance. Both are distinguishable components of tinnitus severity. ..
  37. Neuhoff J, McBeath M, Wanzie W. Dynamic frequency change influences loudness perception: a central, analytic process. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1999;25:1050-9 pubmed
    ..system; is an analytic process; has evolved to take advantage of naturally occurring covariation of frequency and intensity; and reflects a shortcoming of traditional static models of loudness perception in a dynamic natural setting.
  38. O Neill B, Croft R, Nathan P. The loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential (LDAEP) as an in vivo biomarker of central serotonergic function in humans: rationale, evaluation and review of findings. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2008;23:355-70 pubmed publisher
    ..However the LDAEP shows more promise as a potential predictor of antidepressant treatment response and this predictive ability may provide the basis for future research involving the LDAEP. ..
  39. Neuhoff J, Kramer G, Wayand J. Pitch and loudness interact in auditory displays: can the data get lost in the map?. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2002;8:17-25 pubmed
    ..The results suggest that great care should be exercised when using lower level acoustic dimensions to represent multidimensional data. ..
  40. Larson C, Sun J, Hain T. Effects of simultaneous perturbations of voice pitch and loudness feedback on voice F0 and amplitude control. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;121:2862-72 pubmed
    ..96 dB) and smallest with -3 dB stimuli (0.49 dB) but were not affected by the addition of pitch-shift stimuli. Results suggest the F0 and amplitude response mechanisms may be independent but interact in some conditions. ..
  41. Moore B, Glasberg B. A revised model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Hear Res. 2004;188:70-88 pubmed
    We previously described a model for loudness perception for people with cochlear hearing loss. However, that model is incompatible with our most recent and most satisfactory model of loudness for normal hearing...
  42. Suzuki Y, Takeshima H. Equal-loudness-level contours for pure tones. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116:918-33 pubmed
    ..The contours described by Robinson and Dadson exhibit clear differences from the new contours. These differences are most pronounced below 500 Hz and the discrepancy is often as large as 14 dB. ..
  43. Arieh Y, Kelly K, Marks L. Tracking the time to recovery after induced loudness reduction. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;117:3381-4 pubmed
  44. Turner M, Berg B. Temporal limits of level dominance in a sample discrimination task (L). J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;121:1848-51 pubmed
    ..This effect extends well beyond the temporal limits expected from forward masking studies. ..
  45. Chen S, Liu H, Xu Y, Larson C. Voice F0 responses to pitch-shifted voice feedback during English speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;121:1157-63 pubmed
    ..These findings support previous research suggesting the audio vocal system is involved in the control of suprasegmental features of English speech by correcting for errors between voice pitch feedback and the desired F0. ..
  46. Glasberg B, Moore B. Prediction of absolute thresholds and equal-loudness contours using a modified loudness model. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006;120:585-8 pubmed
    ..The modified model also gives reasonably accurate predictions of the equal-loudness contours published in a recent ISO standard. ..
  47. Moore B. Coding of sounds in the auditory system and its relevance to signal processing and coding in cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol. 2003;24:243-54 pubmed
    ..Improved electrode arrays and coding systems may lead to improved coding and, it is hoped, to better performance. ..
  48. Hiller W, Goebel G. When tinnitus loudness and annoyance are discrepant: audiological characteristics and psychological profile. Audiol Neurootol. 2007;12:391-400 pubmed
    ..Tinnitus loudness and annoyance are not necessarily congruent and should be assessed separately. ..
  49. Galvin J, Fu Q. Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2005;6:269-79 pubmed
    ..Lower stimulation rates may provide better recognition of weak acoustic envelope information. ..
  50. Verhey J, Uhlemann M. Spectral loudness summation for sequences of short noise bursts. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008;123:925-34 pubmed publisher
    ..The data indicate that the mechanism underlying the duration effect in spectral loudness is considerably faster than the time constant of about 100 ms commonly associated with the temporal integration of loudness. ..
  51. Heinz M, Colburn H, Carney L. Rate and timing cues associated with the cochlear amplifier: level discrimination based on monaural cross-frequency coincidence detection. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;110:2065-84 pubmed
    ..quot; Monaural coincidence detection is a physiologically realistic mechanism that is extremely general in that it can utilize AN information (average-rate, synchrony, and nonlinear-phase cues) from all SR groups. ..
  52. Chatterjee M, Fu Q, Shannon R. Within-channel gap detection using dissimilar markers in cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998;103:2515-9 pubmed
    ..Thus, gap threshold functions with electrically dissimilar markers serve more as indicators of perceptual distance between the markers and less as measures of temporal resolution. ..
  53. Newman C, Wharton J, Jacobson G. Self-focused and somatic attention in patients with tinnitus. J Am Acad Audiol. 1997;8:143-9 pubmed
    ..Results of this investigation support the belief that attentional mechanisms play an important role in patients' perception of tinnitus and should be considered when planning management strategies. ..