↓ Skip to main content

An Analysis of the Acoustic Input Impedance of the Ear

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
An Analysis of the Acoustic Input Impedance of the Ear
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, August 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10162-013-0407-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert H. Withnell, Lauren E. Gowdy

Abstract

Ear canal acoustics was examined using a one-dimensional lossy transmission line with a distributed load impedance to model the ear. The acoustic input impedance of the ear was derived from sound pressure measurements in the ear canal of healthy human ears. A nonlinear least squares fit of the model to data generated estimates for ear canal radius, ear canal length, and quantified the resistance that would produce transmission losses. Derivation of ear canal radius has application to quantifying the impedance mismatch at the eardrum between the ear canal and the middle ear. The length of the ear canal was found, in general, to be longer than the length derived from the one-quarter wavelength standing wave frequency, consistent with the middle ear being mass-controlled at the standing wave frequency. Viscothermal losses in the ear canal, in some cases, may exceed that attributable to a smooth rigid wall. Resistance in the middle ear was found to contribute significantly to the total resistance. In effect, this analysis "reverse engineers" physical parameters of the ear from sound pressure measurements in the ear canal.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Physics and Astronomy 5 10%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,335,210
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
#101
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,883
of 199,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 199,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.