Literature DB >> 16838535

Amplitude modulation sensitivity as a mechanism increment detection.

Frederick J Gallun1, Ervin R Hafter.   

Abstract

Detectability of a tonal signal added to a tonal masker increases with increasing duration ("temporal integration"), up to some maximum duration. Initially assumed to be some form of energy integration over time, this phenomenon is now often described as the result of a statistical "multiple looks" process. For continuous maskers, listeners may also use a mechanism sensitive to changes in stimulus intensity, possibly a result of inherent sensitivity to amplitude modulation (AM). In order to examine this hypothesis, change detection was investigated in the presence of AM maskers presented at either the same carrier frequency as the target signal or at a distant frequency. The results are compatible with the hypothesis that listeners detect intensity increments by using change-detection mechanisms (modeled here as the outputs of a bank of modulation filters) sensitive to envelope modulation at both low (4-16 Hz) and high (around 100 Hz) rates. AM masking occurred even when the masker was at a carrier frequency more than two octaves above that of the signal to be detected. This finding is also compatible with the hypothesis that similar mechanisms underlie sensitivity to AM (where across-frequency masking is commonly shown) and detection of intensity increments.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16838535     DOI: 10.1121/1.2200136

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


  12 in total

1.  The effect of narrow-band noise maskers on increment detection.

Authors:  Jessica J Messersmith; Harisadhan Patra; Walt Jesteadt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Comparison of level discrimination, increment detection, and comodulation masking release in the audio- and envelope-frequency domains.

Authors:  Paul C Nelson; Stephan D Ewert; Laurel H Carney; Torsten Dau
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Pitch discrimination interference: the role of ear of entry and of octave similarity.

Authors:  Hedwig E Gockel; Ervin R Hafter; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of external noise on detection of intensity increments.

Authors:  Walt Jesteadt; Kim S Schairer; Lance Nizami; Samar Khaddam; Stephen T Neely
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Relative effects of increment and pedestal duration on the detection of intensity increments.

Authors:  Daniel L Valente; Harisadhan Patra; Walt Jesteadt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Masking of low-frequency signals by high-frequency, high-level narrow bands of noise.

Authors:  Harisadhan Patra; Christina M Roup; Lawrence L Feth
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Masking of short tones in noise: Evidence for envelope-based, rather than energy-based detection.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Jessica Chen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Factors affecting the processing of intensity in school-aged children.

Authors:  Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall; John H Grose
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Exploring the role of the modulation spectrum in phoneme recognition.

Authors:  Frederick Gallun; Pamela Souza
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  The dynamic range paradox: a central auditory model of intensity change detection.

Authors:  Andrew J R Simpson; Joshua D Reiss
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.