Literature DB >> 11508968

The effects of production and presentation level on the auditory distance perception of speech.

D S Brungart1, K R Scott.   

Abstract

Although both perceived vocal effort and intensity are known to influence the perceived distance of speech, little is known about the processes listeners use to integrate these two parameters into a single estimate of talker distance. In this series of experiments, listeners judged the distances of prerecorded speech samples presented over headphones in a large open field. In the first experiment, virtual synthesis techniques were used to simulate speech signals produced by a live talker at distances ranging from 0.25 to 64 m. In the second experiment, listeners judged the apparent distances of speech stimuli produced over a 60-dB range of different vocal effort levels (production levels) and presented over a 34-dB range of different intensities (presentation levels). In the third experiment, the listeners judged the distances of time-reversed speech samples. The results indicate that production level and presentation level influence distance perception differently for each of three distinct categories of speech. When the stimulus was high-level voiced speech (produced above 66 dB SPL 1 m from the talker's mouth), the distance judgments doubled with each 8-dB increase in production level and each 12-dB decrease in presentation level. When the stimulus was low-level voiced speech (produced at or below 66 dB SPL at 1 m), the distance judgments doubled with each 15-dB increase in production level but were relatively insensitive to changes in presentation level at all but the highest intensity levels tested. When the stimulus was whispered speech, the distance judgments were unaffected by changes in production level and only decreased with increasing presentation level when the intensity of the stimulus exceeded 66 dB SPL. The distance judgments obtained in these experiments were consistent across a range of different talkers, listeners, and utterances, suggesting that voice-based distance cueing could provide a robust way to control the apparent distances of speech sounds in virtual audio displays.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11508968     DOI: 10.1121/1.1379730

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


  16 in total

1.  Level discrimination of speech sounds by hearing-impaired individuals with and without hearing amplification.

Authors:  William M Whitmer; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 2.  Psychophysics and neuronal bases of sound localization in humans.

Authors:  Jyrki Ahveninen; Norbert Kopčo; Iiro P Jääskeläinen
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-07-22       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Toward a Consensus Description of Vocal Effort, Vocal Load, Vocal Loading, and Vocal Fatigue.

Authors:  Eric J Hunter; Lady Catherine Cantor-Cutiva; Eva van Leer; Miriam van Mersbergen; Chaya Devie Nanjundeswaran; Pasquale Bottalico; Mary J Sandage; Susanna Whitling
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Evidence for enhanced discrimination of virtual auditory distance among blind listeners using level and direct-to-reverberant cues.

Authors:  Andrew J Kolarik; Silvia Cirstea; Shahina Pardhan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Binaural loudness summation for speech presented via earphones and loudspeaker with and without visual cues.

Authors:  Michael Epstein; Mary Florentine
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Best Distance Perception in Virtual Audiovisual Environment.

Authors:  Hui Song; Ke Ma
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-28

7.  Brain dynamics that correlate with effects of learning on auditory distance perception.

Authors:  Matthew G Wisniewski; Eduardo Mercado; Barbara A Church; Klaus Gramann; Scott Makeig
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 8.  Development and current status of the "Cambridge" loudness models.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 3.293

Review 9.  Auditory distance perception in humans: a review of cues, development, neuronal bases, and effects of sensory loss.

Authors:  Andrew J Kolarik; Brian C J Moore; Pavel Zahorik; Silvia Cirstea; Shahina Pardhan
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Familiarity with speech affects cortical processing of auditory distance cues and increases acuity.

Authors:  Matthew G Wisniewski; Eduardo Mercado; Klaus Gramann; Scott Makeig
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.