Max' Notizen

Zecker et al. (2013)

📝 Zuletzt geändert: (heute) 🆕📊 426 Wörter

Zecker, S. G., Hoffman, H. J., Frisina, R., Dubno, J. R., Dhar, S., Wallhagen, M., Kraus, N., Griffith, J. W., Walton, J. P., Eddins, D. A., Newman, C., Victorson, D., Warrier, C. M., & Wilson, R. H. (2013). Audition assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology, 80(11 Suppl 3), S45–S48. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182872dd2

Zotero: 6BCWJ6C8 — /Users/maxmacbookpro/Zotero/storage/6BCWJ6C8/Zecker et al. - 2013 - Audition assessment using the NIH Toolbox.pdf

  • Paper gelesen?
  • Infos rausgeschrieben?

Zecker et al. (2013)

Core argument: This paper describes the auditory assessment battery included in the NIH Toolbox — a multi-domain measurement initiative designed to provide brief, reliable, and widely applicable tools across the lifespan. The auditory battery comprises four instruments: pure-tone hearing thresholds (primary), tympanometry, the Words-in-Noise (WIN) test, and a Hearing Handicap Inventory self-report.

Words-in-Noise (WIN) test — details relevant to thesis:

  • Measures the ability to recognize spoken words against a background of increasingly loud noise, with the signal-to-noise ratio adaptively decreasing trial by trial
  • Task: listeners identify single words presented to each ear individually via headphones
  • The SNR adapts to converge on the level at which the participant achieves 50% correct recognition
  • Normed for ages 6–84 years; brief (~6 minutes), reliable, and administrable by non-specialists
  • Key distinction: speech-in-noise performance is not predictable from pure-tone thresholds alone — captures a distinct auditory processing capability

Why this test is a control measure in the thesis (§3.4.2.3):

  • The WIN test loads on low-level acoustic signal separation, not semantic comprehension or spatial processing
  • Neither the ‘what’-stream (semantic identity) nor the ‘where’-stream (spatial localization) directly drives noise exclusion at the peripheral–subcortical level
  • Used in the thesis as a dissociation check: if the IFJa network is specifically tied to high-level auditory ‘what’ processing, it should NOT predict WIN performance — and indeed the ‘what’-pathway fails to predict WIN (n.s.), confirming functional specificity

Relevance to thesis:

  • Cite in §3.4.2.3 as the source for the WIN task description and methodology
  • The finding that dorsal (not ventral) RSFC predicts WIN performance further validates the stream-specificity of the two networks

BibTeX:

@article{zecker2013,
  author    = {Zecker, Steven G. and Hoffman, Howard J. and Frisina, Robert and
               Dubno, Judy R. and Dhar, Sumitrajit and Wallhagen, Margaret and
               Kraus, Nina and Griffith, James W. and Walton, Joseph P. and
               Eddins, David A. and Newman, Craig and Victorson, David and
               Warrier, Catherine M. and Wilson, Richard H.},
  title     = {Audition assessment using the {NIH} Toolbox},
  journal   = {Neurology},
  year      = {2013},
  volume    = {80},
  number    = {11 Suppl 3},
  pages     = {S45--S48},
  doi       = {10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182872dd2}
}

see also

Tags: neuroscience science source
Superlink: 050 🧠Neuroscience

Source

Created: 2026-05-01