CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsHearing Loss and RehabilitationHuman auditory perception and evaluation

Estimates of Loudness, Loudness Discomfort, and the Auditory Dynamic Range: Normative Estimates, Comparison of Procedures, and Test-Retest Reliability

Sherlock, LaGuinn P., Formby, Craig·2005·Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
DOI 10.3766/jaaa.16.2.4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of this series of experiments was to establish normative reference values for absolute and relative judgements of loudness discomfort and for the auditory dynamic range (DR), and to evaluate intersubject variability and intrasubject test-retest reliability for the respective measures of loudness discomfort. To establish the normal auditory DR, audiometric thresholds and loudness discomfort levels (LDLs) were measured from a group of 59 normal-hearing adults without sound tolerance problems. The resulting estimates of the LDL and DR were on the order of 100 dB HL and 95 dB, respectively. A subset (n = 18) of this larger group participated in further studies in which loudness growth functions and the upper limit of the auditory DR were measured by categorical scaling judgments. The findings revealed no significant differences between the test methods for absolute (LDL) and relative (categorical scaling) judgements of loudness discomfort, intersubject variability, or intrasubject test-retest reliability, and suggest that the simple LDL estimate of loudness discomfort is an efficient and valid clinical measure for characterizing the "threshold of discomfort." El propósito de esta serie de experimentos fue el establecer valores normativos de referencia para juicios objetivos o subjetivos de molestia ante la intensidad subjetiva (loudness) y para el rango dinámico auditivo (DR), y evaluar la variabilidad intersujeto, así como la confiabilidad del test-retest intrasujeto, para las medidas respectivas de la molestia en la intensidad subjetiva. Para establecer el DR auditivo normal, se midieron los umbrales audiométricos y los niveles de molestia en la intensidad subjetiva (LDL) en un grupo de 59 adultos normoyentes sin problemas de tolerancia al sonido. Los estimados resultantes para el LDL y el DR estuvieron en el orden de 100 dB y 95 dB, respectivamente. Un sub-grupo (n = 18) de este grupo más grande participó en estudios posteriores donde las funciones del crecimiento de la intensidad subjetiva y el límite superior del DR auditivo fueron medidos por una escala de juicios de categorización. Los hallazgos no revelaron diferencias significativas entre los métodos de evaluación absolutos (LDL) y los juicios relativos (escala de categorización) para la molestia en la intensidad subjetiva, la variabilidad intersujeto, o para la confiabilidad test-retest intrasujeto, y sugieren que el simple estimado de un LDL es una medida clínica eficiente y válida para caracterizar el "umbral de molestia".

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3766/jaaa.16.2.4

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sherlock, L. P., & Formby, C.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
ORCID
Sherlock, LaGuinn P.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
Publisher
American Academy of Audiology
Published
2005-02-01
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
85-100
ISSN
1050-0545 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3766/jaaa.16.2.4
OpenAlex
W2087969252
Cited by
127
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 14 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Audiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r21dc004514-02)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R21DC04514)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Human auditory perception and evaluation
Keywords
loudness discomfort level, reference values, loudness growth function, test-retest reliability, interindividual variability, normal hearing adults, sound tolerance, subjective loudness, audiometric thresholds
MeSH terms
Adult, Audiometry, Audiometry, Pure-Tone, Auditory Threshold, Female, Humans, Loudness Perception, Male, Middle Aged, Recruitment Detection, Audiologic, Hyperacusis, Reference Values, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review