ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2018
Correlations between otoacoustic emissions and performance in common psychoacoustical tasks.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Peripheral and Central Auditory Processing after Treatment for Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- Modest sex differences in the test of basic auditory capabilities (TBAC).Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- The role of the medial olivocochlear reflex in psychophysical masking and intensity resolution in humans: a review.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Review
- Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks.PloS one · 2021Article
- Examining replicability of an otoacoustic measure of cochlear function during selective attention.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018Article
- Differences in common psychoacoustical tasks by sex, menstrual cycle, and race.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Performance was measured on seven common psychoacoustical tasks for about 75 highly trained subjects. Because some psychoacoustical outcomes varied by race, the subjects were partitioned into White and Non-White categories for analysis. Sex, race, and menstrual-cycle differences in performance are described in a companion paper [McFadden, Pasanen, Maloney, Leshikar, and Pho (2018). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143, 2338-2354]. Also measured for all subjects were three types of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs): spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs), click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs), and distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs). The experimental question was whether and how OAEs were correlated with psychoacoustical performance. In accord with past findings, the SOAEs and CEOAEs exhibited substantial sex and race differences, but the DPOAEs did not. Somewhat surprisingly, the correlations between OAEs and psychoacoustical performance were generally weak. No form of OAE was highly correlated with any psychoacoustical task for both sexes within a race category. Thus, there was no compelling evidence that the mechanisms underlying OAEs also contribute systematically to performance in any of the simultaneous or temporal masking tasks studied here. Especially surprising were the weak correlations between OAEs and detection of a tone in the quiet. Apparently individual differences in psychoacoustical performance reside more in post-cochlear (neural) mechanisms than in individual differences in the cochlear ("mechanical") mechanisms underlying the OAEs measured here.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.