It was interesting to see the varied results from the activities listed above. In the Two-Point Discrimination Test, many individuals had very different responses for when they could feel two points of touch, as opposed to one point of touch. It was no surprise that the fingertips were the most sensitive (have a higher receptor density). The least sensitive area (which either indicated more convergence of neurons or lower receptor density), the back of calf, also resulted in the highest standard deviation, meaning there was a greater disparity of results. This could be because different groups tested different spots on the back of the calf, or because of differences in individuals’ sensitivity (have more/less relative receptor density or
…show more content…
The first test on hearing acuity did not reveal much except that one can hear the sound of a timer much farther with no ear plug. This result leads one to believe there is no sensorineural loss of hearing in the left ear of the subject tested. A different student was used for the Rinne test, and results show much longer bone-conduction time in the right ear when the fork was against the bone and more air-conduction sensitivity in the left ear. This would indicate conductive hearing loss in the right ear and normal hearing in the left ear, since “normal hearing will show an air-conduction time that is twice as long as the bone conduction” (which was the result for the left ear). The Weber test that followed indicates that the subject either has ipsilateral conductive hearing loss in the left ear, contrary to the Rinne test results --since that’s the ear that the sound vibration was experienced as “louder” with both un- and plugged ears-- or sensorineural hearing loss in the right. Thus, from both the Rinne and Weber tests, we can conclude that the subject may have both conduction and sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear. Conductive hearing loss is due to damage to the eardrum (tympanic membrane) or bones (ossicles) in the middle ear, which prevents the sound from reaching the cochlea, and sensorineural hearing loss is due to damage to the cochlea or the cochlear nerve; thus, there may be damage to the subject’s middle and inner
The first test on hearing acuity did not reveal much except that one can hear the sound of a timer much farther with no ear plug. This result leads one to believe there is no sensorineural loss of hearing in the left ear of the subject tested. A different student was used for the Rinne test, and results show much longer bone-conduction time in the right ear when the fork was against the bone and more air-conduction sensitivity in the left ear. This would indicate conductive hearing loss in the right ear and normal hearing in the left ear, since “normal hearing will show an air-conduction time that is twice as long as the bone conduction” (which was the result for the left ear). The Weber test that followed indicates that the subject either has ipsilateral conductive hearing loss in the left ear, contrary to the Rinne test results --since that’s the ear that the sound vibration was experienced as “louder” with both un- and plugged ears-- or sensorineural hearing loss in the right. Thus, from both the Rinne and Weber tests, we can conclude that the subject may have both conduction and sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear. Conductive hearing loss is due to damage to the eardrum (tympanic membrane) or bones (ossicles) in the middle ear, which prevents the sound from reaching the cochlea, and sensorineural hearing loss is due to damage to the cochlea or the cochlear nerve; thus, there may be damage to the subject’s middle and inner