Literature DB >> 10335634

Resolution of front-back ambiguity in spatial hearing by listener and source movement.

F L Wightman1, D J Kistler.   

Abstract

Normally, the apparent position of a sound source corresponds closely to its actual position. However, in some experimental situations listeners make large errors, such as indicating that a source in the frontal hemifield appears to be in the rear hemifield, or vice versa. These front-back confusions are thought to be a result of the inherent ambiguity of the primary interaural difference cues, interaural time difference (ITD) in particular. A given ITD could have been produced by a sound source anywhere on the so-called "cone of confusion." More than 50 years ago Wallach [J. Exp. Psychol. 27, 339-368 (1940)] argued that small head movements could provide the information necessary to resolve the ambiguity. The direction of the change in ITD that accompanies a head rotation is an unambiguous indicator of the proper hemifield. The experiments reported here are a modern test of Wallach's hypothesis. Listeners indicated the apparent positions of real and virtual sound sources in conditions in which head movements were either restricted or encouraged. The front-back confusions made in the restricted condition nearly disappeared in the condition in which head movements were encouraged. In a second experiment head movements were restricted, but the sound source was moved, either by the experimenter or by the listener. Only when the listener moved the sound source did front-back confusions disappear. The results clearly support Wallach's hypothesis and suggest further that head movements are not required to produce the dynamic cues needed to resolve front-back ambiguity.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10335634     DOI: 10.1121/1.426899

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  45 in total

1.  Location and acoustic scale cues in concurrent speech recognition.

Authors:  D Timothy Ives; Martin D Vestergaard; Doris J Kistler; Roy D Patterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Influence of the facial ruff on the sound-receiving characteristics of the barn owl's ears.

Authors:  Mark von Campenhausen; Hermann Wagner
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  Sound localisation during illusory self-rotation.

Authors:  Ken I McAnally; Russell L Martin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-10-17       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Distortions of auditory space during rapid head turns.

Authors:  Joel Cooper; Simon Carlile; David Alais
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Limiting unwanted cues via random rove applied to the yes-no and multiple-alternative forced choice paradigms.

Authors:  Huanping Dai; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Compression of auditory space during rapid head turns.

Authors:  Johahn Leung; David Alais; Simon Carlile
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-04-21       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Evolution of directional hearing in moths via conversion of bat detection devices to asymmetric pressure gradient receivers.

Authors:  Andrew Reid; Thibaut Marin-Cudraz; James F C Windmill; Michael D Greenfield
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Spatial hearing in Cope's gray treefrog: I. Open and closed loop experiments on sound localization in the presence and absence of noise.

Authors:  Michael S Caldwell; Mark A Bee
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  Haptic object localization in the vibrissal system: behavior and performance.

Authors:  Per Magne Knutsen; Maciej Pietr; Ehud Ahissar
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-08-16       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Sound localization behavior in ferrets: comparison of acoustic orientation and approach-to-target responses.

Authors:  F R Nodal; V M Bajo; C H Parsons; J W Schnupp; A J King
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2007-12-23       Impact factor: 3.590

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.