Leis B R, Lutman M E
Scand Audiol. 1979;8(2):93-9. doi: 10.3109/01050397909076307.
Hearing levels for ipsilateral impedance probes have not yet been established. This study compares two techniques for "transfer of threshold" from the standardised TDH-39 earphone to the unstandardised probe. Ten normal hearing subjects participated, using both a loudness balance technique and a reflex measurement technique. The reflex measurement technique involved comparing the intensity required from each transducer to produce an equal reflex response, whereas the loudness balance technique compared the intensity required from each transducer for equal loudness. The two techniques were found to differ significantly in terms of the Hearing Level values which they produced. Differences between techniques amounted to approximately 3 dB at 1000 Hz, 11 dB at 2000 Hz, and 7 dB at 3000 Hz. As a comparison of the two techniques, the day to day variances were statistically estimated. The reflex measurement technique was shown to be more reliable than the loudness balance technique.
同侧阻抗探头的听力水平尚未确定。本研究比较了两种将阈值从标准化的TDH - 39耳机“转移”到未标准化探头的技术。十名听力正常的受试者参与其中,采用了响度平衡技术和反射测量技术。反射测量技术涉及比较每个换能器产生相等反射反应所需的强度,而响度平衡技术则比较每个换能器产生相等响度所需的强度。发现这两种技术所产生的听力水平值存在显著差异。在1000赫兹时,技术间差异约为3分贝;在2000赫兹时为11分贝;在3000赫兹时为7分贝。作为两种技术的比较,对每日差异进行了统计估计。结果表明,反射测量技术比响度平衡技术更可靠。