Literature DB >> 14514207

Informational masking and musical training.

Andrew J Oxenham1, Brian J Fligor, Christine R Mason, Gerald Kidd.   

Abstract

The relationship between musical training and informational masking was studied for 24 young adult listeners with normal hearing. The listeners were divided into two groups based on musical training. In one group, the listeners had little or no musical training; the other group was comprised of highly trained, currently active musicians. The hypothesis was that musicians may be less susceptible to informational masking, which is thought to reflect central, rather than peripheral, limitations on the processing of sound. Masked thresholds were measured in two conditions, similar to those used by Kidd et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 3475-3480 (1994)]. In both conditions the signal was comprised of a series of repeated tone bursts at 1 kHz. The masker was comprised of a series of multitone bursts, gated with the signal. In one condition the frequencies of the masker were selected randomly for each burst; in the other condition the masker frequencies were selected randomly for the first burst of each interval and then remained constant throughout the interval. The difference in thresholds between the two conditions was taken as a measure of informational masking. Frequency selectivity, using the notched-noise method, was also estimated in the two groups. The results showed no difference in frequency selectivity between the two groups, but showed a large and significant difference in the amount of informational masking between musically trained and untrained listeners. This informational masking task, which requires no knowledge specific to musical training (such as note or interval names) and is generally not susceptible to systematic short- or medium-term training effects, may provide a basis for further studies of analytic listening abilities in different populations.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14514207     DOI: 10.1121/1.1598197

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


  45 in total

1.  Objective and subjective psychophysical measures of auditory stream integration and segregation.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-07-24

2.  Effect of musical training on static and dynamic measures of spectral-pattern discrimination.

Authors:  Stanley Sheft; Kirsten Smayda; Valeriy Shafiro; W Todd Maddox; Bharath Chandrasekaran
Journal:  Proc Meet Acoust       Date:  2013-06-02

3.  Spatial release from masking with noise-vocoded speech.

Authors:  Richard L Freyman; Uma Balakrishnan; Karen S Helfer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Role of masker predictability in the cocktail party problem.

Authors:  Gary L Jones; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech detection in spatial and nonspatial speech maskers.

Authors:  Uma Balakrishnan; Richard L Freyman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Lexical and indexical cues in masking by competing speech.

Authors:  Karen S Helfer; Richard L Freyman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Effects of auditory selective attention on neural phase: individual differences and short-term training.

Authors:  Aeron Laffere; Fred Dick; Adam Tierney
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Auditory discrimination of force of impact.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Ching-Ju Liu; Christophe N J Stoelinga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  New perspectives on the measurement and time course of auditory enhancement.

Authors:  Lei Feng; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  Music perception, pitch, and the auditory system.

Authors:  Josh H McDermott; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2008-10-02       Impact factor: 6.627

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.