J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31(02): 111-117
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18099
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Across- and Within-Channel Gap Detection Thresholds Yielded by Two Different Test Applications

Abdulsalam Alhaidary
*   Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Kishore Tanniru
*   Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 May 2020 (online)



Individuals with auditory processing disorders show some deficits with the temporal processing of auditory signals. Gap detection measurements are commonly used to assess temporal processing skills across different listening tasks.


The aim of this study was to compare the gap detection thresholds (GDTs) in across-channel (AC) and within-channel (WC) tasks by using two computer applications—Adaptive Tests of Temporal Resolution (ATTR) and Psycon.

Research Design:

A within-subject study design.

Study Sample:

Twenty-one young adults with normal hearing participated in the study.

Data Collection and Analysis:

Each participant’s gap detection performance was assessed using the narrowband noise stimuli of the ATTR and Psycon applications. Four conditions were administered with 2 kHz as the leading frequency marker before the gap and 1 kHz as the trailing frequency marker after the gap for AC tasks, and with 2 kHz as both the leading and trailing frequency markers for WC tasks.


The results showed lower GDTs for the WC tasks than the AC tasks. Also, the GDT values for the WC tasks were lower in the ATTR than Psycon; whereas the GDT values for the AC tasks were higher in the ATTR than Psycon.


The differences noted in the obtained GDT values from the ATTR and Psycon applications may be attributed to subtle spectral differences in the stimuli of the two programs. The present study also indicates that because of the inherent differences in the stimuli generated by the different software, the normative values for GDTs may need to be established according to evaluation tools before drawing conclusions about clinical conditions.


  • American Academy of Audiology (AAA) 2010. Clinical Practice Guidelines Diagnosis, Treatment and Management of Children and Adults with Central Auditory Processing Disorder. https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/CAPD%20Guidelines%208-2010.pdf_539952af956c79.73897613.pdf . Accessed February 18, 2019
  • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) 2005 (Central) auditory processing disorders—The role of the audiologist [Technical Report]. https://www.asha.org/policy/PS2005-00114/ . Accessed February 18, 2019
  • Boersma P, Weenink D. 2016 Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. (Version 6.0.14). [Computer Program]. http://www.praat.org/ . Accessed February 18, 2019
  • Brown LG. 1996; Additional rules for the transformed up-down method in psychophysics. Percept Psychophys 58 (06) 959-962
  • Elangovan S, Stuart A. 2008; Natural boundaries in gap detection are related to categorical perception of stop consonants. Ear Hear 29 (05) 761-774
  • Florentine M, Buus S, Geng W. 1999; Psychometric functions for gap detection in a yes-no procedure. J Acoust Soc Am 106 (06) 3512-3520
  • Formby C, Barker C, Abbey H, Raney JJ. 1993; Detection of silent temporal gaps between narrow-band noise makers having second-formantlike properties of voiceless stop/vowel combinations. J Acoust Soc Am 93 (02) 1023-1027
  • Grose JH, Hall III JW, Buss E, Hatch D. 2001; Gap detection for similar and dissimilar gap markers. J Acoust Soc Am 109 (04) 1587-1595
  • Hess BA, Blumsack JT, Ross ME, Brock RE. 2012; Performance at different stimulus intensities with the within- and across-channel adaptive tests of temporal resolution. Int J Audiol 51 (12) 900-905
  • Hoover E, Pasquesi L, Souza P. 2015; Comparison of clinical and traditional gap detection tests. J Am Acad Audiol 26 (06) 540-546
  • Keith R. 2000. Random Gap Detection Test. St. Louis, MO: Auditec;
  • Kwon BJ. 2012; AUX: a scripting language for auditory signal processing and software packages for psychoacoustic experiments and education. Behav Res Methods 44 (02) 361-373
  • Levitt H. 1971; Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49 (2B) 467-477
  • Lister J, Besing J, Koehnke J. 2002; Effects of age and frequency disparity on gap discrimination. J Acoust Soc Am 111 (06) 2793-2800
  • Lister J, Roberts R, Krause JC, DeBiase D, Carlson H. 2011; An adaptive clinical test of temporal resolution: within-channel and across-channel gap detection. Int J Audiol 50 (06) 375-384
  • Lister J, Roberts R, Lister FL. 2011; An adaptive clinical test of temporal resolution: age effects. Int J Audiol 50 (06) 367-374
  • Lister J, Roberts R, Shackelford J, Rogers C. 2006; An adaptive clinical test of temporal resolution. Am J Audiol 15 (02) 133-140
  • Ma X, McPherson B, Ma L. 2015; Behavioral assessment of auditory processing disorder in children with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 79 (03) 349-355
  • McCroskey RL, Keith R. 1996. Auditory Fusion Test–Revised. St. Louis, MO: Auditec;
  • Mishra SK, Panda MR. 2016; Rapid auditory learning of temporal gap detection. J Acoust Soc Am 140 (01) EL50
  • Mishra SK, Panda MR, Herbert C. 2014; Enhanced auditory temporal gap detection in listeners with musical training. J Acoust Soc Am 136 (02) EL173-EL178
  • Moore BC. 2013. An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing. 6th ed. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill;
  • Musiek FE, Shinn JB, Jirsa R, Bamiou DE, Baran JA, Zaida E. 2005; GIN (Gaps-In-Noise) test performance in subjects with confirmed central auditory nervous system involvement. Ear Hear 26 (06) 608-618
  • Phillips DP, Hall SE. 2002; Auditory temporal gap detection for noise markers with partially overlapping and non-overlapping spectra. Hear Res 174 (1–2) 133-141
  • Phillips DP, Taylor TL, Hall SE, Carr MM, Mossop JE. 1997; Detection of silent intervals between noises activating different perceptual channels: some properties of “central” auditory gap detection. J Acoust Soc America 101 (06) 3694-3705
  • Rawool V. 2016. Auditory Processing Deficits: Assessment and Intervention. New York: Theme;
  • Shailer MJ, Moore BC. 1983; Gap detection as a function of frequency, bandwidth, and level. J Acoust Soc Am 74 (02) 467-473
  • Soranzo A, Grassi M. 2014; PSYCHOACOUSTICS: a comprehensive MATLAB toolbox for auditory testing. Front Psychol 5: 712
  • Wong AC, McPherson B. 2015; Adaptive tests of temporal resolution: comparison with the gaps-in-noise test in normal-hearing young adults. Int J Audiol 54 (01) 29-36