Growth Functions of Tone Burst Evoked and Distortion-Product Otoacoustic Emissions in Humans

  • F. P. Harris
  • R. Probst
Part of the Lecture Notes in Biomathematics book series (LNBM, volume 87)


Transiently evoked and distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs, DPOAEs) are both low-level acoustic phenomena that ru;e m~asured m the human ear canal coincident with acoustic stimulation. Short-durauon Signals such ~s clicks or tonebursts stimulate TEOAEs. Two continuous signals that are closely space~ m frequency produce DPOAEs. There are similarities and differences in the characteristics of the two forms of emissions. Therefore, the extent to which they are bemg generated by the same mechanisms has not been determined.


Growth Function Stimulus Level Otoacoustic Emission Distortion Product DPOAE Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Davis, H. (1983). An active process in cochlear mechanics, Hear. Res. 9, 79–90.Google Scholar
  2. Oaskill, S.A. and Brown, A.M. (November,1989). The relationship between acoustic distortion (2fl–f2) and threshold sensitivity. Paper presented at the meeting of the Brit. Soc. of Audio!., Nottingham, England.Google Scholar
  3. Harris, F.P. (1989). Distortion-product emissions and pure–tone behavioral thresholds. Paper presented at the 2nd Int’!’ Symp. on Cochlear Mechanics and Otoacoustic Emissions, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  4. Harris, F.P., Lonsbury-Martin, B.L., Stagner, B. B., Coats, A.C. and Martin, O.K. (1989). Acoustic distortion products in humans: Systematic changes in amplitude as a function of f2/fl ratio. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 220–229.Google Scholar
  5. Kemp, D.T. (1978). Stmulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 64, 1386–1391.Google Scholar
  6. Kemp, D.T. (1979). Evidence of mechanical nonlinearity and frequency selective wave amplification in the cochlea, Arch. Otorhinolaryngo!. 224, 37–45.Google Scholar
  7. Kemp, D.T. and Brown, A.M. (1983). A comparison of mechanical nonlinearities in the cochleae of man and gerbil from ear canal measurements, in Hearing––Physiological Bases and Psychophysics, edited by R. Klinke and R. Hartmann (Springer, Berlin), pp. 82–88.Google Scholar
  8. Kemp, D.T. and Brown, A.M. (1984). Ear canal acoustic and round window electrical correlates of 2fl–f2 distortion generated in the cochlea, Hear. Res. 13, 39–46.Google Scholar
  9. Lonsbury-Martin, B.L., Harris, F.P., Stagner, B.B., Hawkins, M.D., and Martin, O.K. (1990). Distortion-product emissions in humans: 1. Basic properties in normally hearing subjects, Ann. Otol. Rhinol & Laryngol. Supp. 147, 3–14.Google Scholar
  10. Lonsbury-Martin, B.L., Martin, O.K., Probst, R., and Coats, A.C. (1987). Acoustic distortion products in rabbit ear canal. I. Basic features and physiological vulnerability, Hear. Res. 28, 173–189.Google Scholar
  11. Probst, R., Antonelli, C. and Pieren, C. (1990). Methods and preliminary results of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in normal and pathologic ears. Adv. Audio!. (in press).Google Scholar
  12. Probst, R. Coats, A.C. Martin, O.K., and Lonsbury–Martin, B.L. (1986). Spontaneous, clickand toneburst–evoked otoacoustic emissions from normal ears, Hear. Res. 21, 261–275.Google Scholar
  13. Probst, R. and Hauser, R. (1990). Dependency of the otoacoustic distortion product emission 2f1–f2 on primary–tone level variation L2–Ll in normal human ears. Poster presented at the midwinter meeting of the Assoc. for Research in Otolaryngol.Google Scholar
  14. Puel , J.-L. and Rebillard, O. (1990). Effect of contralateral sound stimulation on the distortion product 2fl–t2: Evidence that the media! efferent system is involved. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 87, 1630–1635.Google Scholar
  15. Ryan, S. and Kemp, D. (1989). Otoacoustic emissions. What should we measure? Paper presented at the meeting of the British Soc. of Audio!., Nottingham, England.Google Scholar
  16. Wit, H.P. and Ritsma, R.I. (1980). Evoked acoustical responses from the human ear: Some experimental results, Hear. Res. 2, 253–261.Google Scholar
  17. Zwicker, E. (1983). Delayed evoked oto–acoustic emissions and their suppression by Gaussian–shaped pressure impUlses, Hear. Res. 11, 359–371.Google Scholar
  18. Zwicker, E. and Harris. F.P. (1990). Psychoacoustica! and ear canal cancellation of the (2fl–f2)–distortion product. J. Acoust. Soc. Am .. 87, 2583–2591.Google Scholar
  19. Zwicker, E. and Lumer, O. (1985). Evaluating traveling wave characteristics in man by an active nonlinear cochlear preprocessing mode!. In: Peripheral Auditory Mechanisms. (Eds: Allen, J.B. et a!.) Springer, Berlin, pp. 250–257.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. P. Harris
    • 1
  • R. Probst
    • 1
  1. 1.HNO-UniversitätsklinikKantonsspitalBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations