The Frequency Selectivity of Gain Reduction Masking: Analysis Using Two Equally-Effective Maskers

Conference paper


The “temporal effect” occurs when masked threshold is shifted as a result of the signal being preceded by sound (i.e., a “precursor”) instead of silence. Several authors have suggested that the temporal effect may be mediated by the medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR), which reduces the gain of the cochlear amplifier. We recently measured an analogous temporal effect in forward masking (Jennings et al., J Acoust Soc Am 125:2172-2181, 2009). This study estimated the basilar membrane input-output (I/O) function using psychophysical methods. When an on-frequency precursor was present, the gain of the I/O function decreased, consistent with the MOCR hypothesis. Here, we present data on the same forward masking temporal effect, but with specific interest on the tuning of the precursor’s effect. In experiment 1, off-frequency GOM was measured to estimate the I/O function. In experiment 2, psychophysical tuning curves (PTCs) were measured to estimate the tuning of the precursor for two signal levels. Finally, in experiment 3 we combined the masker levels from experiment 1 and the precursor levels from experiment 2 to measure the shift in signal threshold. In the discussion, we model these data in terms of gain reduction and additivity of masking. The results and modeling suggest that the precursor reduced the gain of the I/O function and that the resulting PTCs reflect the tuning of the gain reduction mechanism.


Olivocochlear efferents Temporal masking Models of forward masking 



This research was funded by NIH/NIDCD grants R01-DC008327 & T32-DC00030. We thank Michael G. Heinz for providing helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.


  1. Backus BC, Guinan JJ (2006) Time-course of the human medial olivocochlear reflex. J Acoust Soc Am 119:2889–2904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Jennings SG, Strickland EA, Heinz MG (2009) Precursor effects on behavioral estimates of frequency selectivity and gain. J Acoust Soc Am 125:2172–2181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Krull V, Strickland EA (2008) The effect of a precursor on growth of forward masking. J Acoust Soc Am 123:4352–4357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49:467–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Liberman MC (1988) Response properties of cochlear efferent neurons: monaural vs. binaural stimulation and the effects of noise. J Neurophysiol 60:1779–1798PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ (1997) A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane non-linearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 101:3666–3675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Plack CJ, O’Hanlon CG (2003) Forward masking additivity and auditory compression at low and high frequencies. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 4:405–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Plack CJ, Drga V, Lopez-Poveda EA (2004) Inferred basilar-membrane response functions for listeners with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 115:1684–1695PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Plack CJ, Oxenham AJ, Drga V (2006) Masking by inaudible sounds and the linearity of temporal summation. J Neurosci 26:8767–8773PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Plack CJ, Carcagno S, Oxenham AJ (2007) A further test of the linearity of temporal summation in forward masking. J Acoust Soc Am 122:1880–1883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Penner MJ, Shiffrin RM (1980) Nonlinearities in the coding of intensity within the context of a temporal summation model. J Acoust Soc Am 67:617–627PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Strickland EA (2001) The relationship between frequency selectivity and overshoot. J Acoust Soc Am 109:2062–2073PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Strickland EA (2004) The temporal effect with notched-noise maskers: analysis in terms of input-output functions. J Acoust Soc Am 115:2234–2245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Strickland EA (2008) The relationship between precursor level and the temporal effect. J Acoust Soc Am 123:946–954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Warren EH, Liberman MC (1989) Effects of contralateral sound on auditory-nerve responses. II. Dependence on stimulus variables. Hear Res 37:105–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Speech Language and Hearing SciencesHeavilon Hall, Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations