Author response to peck (2018), “questionable use of ‘nonorganic’ in ‘estimating nonorganic hearing thresholds’”

Linda W. Norrix, Thomas Muller

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review


Purpose: The purpose of this letter is to respond to Dr. Peck’s (2018) letter to the editor regarding the use of the term “nonorganic” to describe hearing loss, demonstrated by the pure tone audiogram that cannot be explained or is greater than what can be explained by a physiological auditory disorder. Conclusions: We prefer the term “nonorganic” rather than the term “false and exaggerated hearing loss.” “Nonorganic,” in our view, is a nonjudgmental term and, as stated by Austen and Lynch (2004), implies “as little as possible about its cause” (p. 450).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)368-369
Number of pages2
JournalAmerican journal of audiology
Issue number3
StatePublished - Sep 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Speech and Hearing


Dive into the research topics of 'Author response to peck (2018), “questionable use of ‘nonorganic’ in ‘estimating nonorganic hearing thresholds’”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this