Literature DB >> 10997052

The auditory motion aftereffect: its tuning and specificity in the spatial and frequency domains.

C J Dong1, N V Swindale, P Zakarauskas, V Hayward, M S Cynader.   

Abstract

In this paper, the auditory motion aftereffect (aMAE) was studied, using real moving sound as both the adapting and the test stimulus. The sound was generated by a loudspeaker mounted on a robot arm that was able to move quietly in three-dimensional space. A total of 7 subjects with normal hearing were tested in three experiments. The results from Experiment 1 showed a robust and reliable negative aMAE in all the subjects. After listening to a sound source moving repeatedly to the right, a stationary sound source was perceived to move to the left. The magnitude of the aMAE tended to increase with adapting velocity up to the highest velocity tested (20 degrees/sec). The aftereffect was largest when the adapting and the test stimuli had similar spatial location and frequency content. Offsetting the locations of the adapting and the test stimuli by 20 degrees reduced the size of the effect by about 50%. A similar decline occurred when the frequency of the adapting and the test stimuli differed by one octave. Our results suggest that the human auditory system possesses specialized mechanisms for detecting auditory motion in the spatial domain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10997052     DOI: 10.3758/bf03212091

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  9 in total

1.  Motion-onset auditory-evoked potentials critically depend on history.

Authors:  Ramona Grzeschik; Martin Böckmann-Barthel; Roland Mühler; Michael B Hoffmann
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Responses of cat primary auditory cortex neurons to moving stimuli with dynamically changing interaural delays.

Authors:  N I Nikitin; A L Varfolomeev; L M Kotelenko
Journal:  Neurosci Behav Physiol       Date:  2004-11

3.  Sound frequency affects the auditory motion-onset response in humans.

Authors:  Mikaella Sarrou; Pia Marlena Schmitz; Nicole Hamm; Rudolf Rübsamen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Stimulus-specific adaptation to visual but not auditory motion direction in the barn owl's optic tectum.

Authors:  Dante F Wasmuht; Jose L Pena; Yoram Gutfreund
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 3.386

5.  Modulation frequency as a cue for auditory speed perception.

Authors:  Irene Senna; Cesare V Parise; Marc O Ernst
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Distortions of perceived auditory and visual space following adaptation to motion.

Authors:  Ross W Deas; Neil W Roach; Paul V McGraw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-08-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The impact of temporal fine structure and signal envelope on auditory motion perception.

Authors:  Michaela Warnecke; Z Ellen Peng; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Discrimination contours for moving sounds reveal duration and distance cues dominate auditory speed perception.

Authors:  Tom C A Freeman; Johahn Leung; Ella Wufong; Emily Orchard-Mills; Simon Carlile; David Alais
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  The Perception of Auditory Motion.

Authors:  Simon Carlile; Johahn Leung
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 3.293

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.