We examine a contrast in understanding tinnitus and how this impacts on treatment approaches. First, a physiological account of tinnitus is described based on disinhibition and cortical remapping following injury at the receptor level, the analog for tinnitus being the 'phantom limb pain' phenomenon. Secondly, an experimental model of tinnitus is reviewed that relies on inference from conditioning animal behaviour. Arising from this, a role for conditioning in people distressed by tinnitus has been proposed, based on the unfounded premise that, for humans, tinnitus is a neutral stimulus, the distress being due to association with other stressful events. We critique this because we believe it influences approaches to tinnitus treatment. Finally, the phenomenology of tinnitus in the human case is analysed, with its nature illuminated via a series of distinctions with hearing impairment. Tinnitus can be intrinsically stressful for some people. Understanding this emphasizes the need to involve concepts and treatment in the area of clinical psychology. A flexible coalition between clinical audiologists and clinical psychologists is proposed as fruitful for tinnitus and related rehabilitation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 March 2013.
All research outputs
#16,086,610
of 23,864,146 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Audiology
#1,023
of 1,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,734
of 112,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Audiology
#113
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,864,146 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 112,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
