» Articles » PMID: 22225062

Statistical Bias in the Assessment of Binaural Benefit Relative to the Better Ear

Overview
Journal J Acoust Soc Am
Date 2012 Jan 10
PMID 22225062
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The comparison of measured binaural performance with the better of two monaural measures (one from each ear) may lead to underestimated binaural benefit due to statistical sampling bias that favors the monaural condition. The mathematical basis of such bias is reviewed and applied to speech reception thresholds measured in 32 bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users for coincident and spatially separated speech and noise. It is shown that the bias increases with test-retest variation and is maximal for uncorrelated samples of identical underlying performance in each ear. When measured differences between ears were assumed to reflect actual underlying performance differences, the bias averaged across the CI users was about 0.2 dB for coincident target and noise, and 0.1 dB for spatially separated conditions. An upper-bound estimate of the bias, based on the assumption that both ears have the same underlying performance and observed differences were due to test-retest variation, was about 0.7 dB regardless of noise location. To the extent that the test-retest variation in these data is comparable to other studies, the results indicate that binaural benefits in bilateral cochlear implant users are not substantially underestimated (on for average) when binaural performance is compared with the better ear in each listening configuration.

Citing Articles

Spatial Release From Masking in 2-Year-Olds With Normal Hearing and With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Hess C, Misurelli S, Litovsky R Trends Hear. 2018; 22:2331216518775567.

PMID: 29761735 PMC: 5956632. DOI: 10.1177/2331216518775567.


Contralateral Interference Caused by Binaurally Presented Competing Speech in Adult Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users.

Goupell M, Stakhovskaya O, Bernstein J Ear Hear. 2017; 39(1):110-123.

PMID: 28787316 PMC: 5741461. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000470.


Having Two Ears Facilitates the Perceptual Separation of Concurrent Talkers for Bilateral and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implantees.

Bernstein J, Goupell M, Schuchman G, Rivera A, Brungart D Ear Hear. 2016; 37(3):289-302.

PMID: 26886027 PMC: 4869863. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000284.


Does Bilateral Experience Lead to Improved Spatial Unmasking of Speech in Children Who Use Bilateral Cochlear Implants?.

Litovsky R, Misurelli S Otol Neurotol. 2016; 37(2):e35-42.

PMID: 26756153 PMC: 4712724. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000905.


Spatial release from masking in children with bilateral cochlear implants and with normal hearing: Effect of target-interferer similarity.

Misurelli S, Litovsky R J Acoust Soc Am. 2015; 138(1):319-31.

PMID: 26233032 PMC: 4506300. DOI: 10.1121/1.4922777.

References
1.
Tyler R, Noble W, Dunn C, Witt S . Some benefits and limitations of binaural cochlear implants and our ability to measure them. Int J Audiol. 2006; 45 Suppl 1:S113-9. DOI: 10.1080/14992020600783095. View

2.
Koch D, Soli S, Downing M, Osberger M . Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation: prospective study in adults. Cochlear Implants Int. 2009; 11(2):84-99. DOI: 10.1002/cii.413. View

3.
Tyler R, Dunn C, Witt S, Noble W . Speech perception and localization with adults with bilateral sequential cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2007; 28(2 Suppl):86S-90S. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31803153e2. View

4.
Eapen R, Buss E, Adunka M, Pillsbury 3rd H, Buchman C . Hearing-in-noise benefits after bilateral simultaneous cochlear implantation continue to improve 4 years after implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2009; 30(2):153-9. PMC: 3357061. DOI: 10.1097/mao.0b013e3181925025. View

5.
Laske R, Veraguth D, Dillier N, Binkert A, Holzmann D, Huber A . Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Otol Neurotol. 2009; 30(3):313-8. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31819bd7e6. View