Literature DB >> 17225418

Individual differences in the sensitivity to pitch direction.

Catherine Semal1, Laurent Demany.   

Abstract

It is commonly assumed that one can always assign a direction-upward or downward-to a percept of pitch change. The present study shows that this is true for some, but not all, listeners. Frequency difference limens (FDLs, in cents) for pure tones roved in frequency were measured in two conditions. In one condition, the task was to detect frequency changes; in the other condition, the task was to identify the direction of frequency changes. For three listeners, the identification FDL was about 1.5 times smaller than the detection FDL, as predicted (counterintuitively) by signal detection theory under the assumption that performance in the two conditions was limited by one and the same internal noise. For three other listeners, however, the identification FDL was much larger than the detection FDL. The latter listeners had relatively high detection FDLs. They had no difficulty in identifying the direction of just-detectable changes in intensity, or in the frequency of amplitude modulation. Their difficulty in perceiving the direction of small frequency/pitch changes showed up not only when the task required absolute judgments of direction, but also when the directions of two successive frequency changes had to be judged as identical or different.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17225418     DOI: 10.1121/1.2357708

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


  22 in total

1.  Stimulus uncertainty and insensitivity to pitch-change direction.

Authors:  Samuel R Mathias; Christophe Micheyl; Peter J Bailey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Voice fundamental frequency modulates vocal response to pitch perturbations during English speech.

Authors:  Hanjun Liu; James Auger; Charles R Larson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Interindividual variability in auditory scene analysis revealed by confidence judgements.

Authors:  C Pelofi; V de Gardelle; P Egré; D Pressnitzer
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Symmetric interactions and interference between pitch and timbre.

Authors:  Emily J Allen; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  On the choice of adequate randomization ranges for limiting the use of unwanted cues in same-different, dual-pair, and oddity tasks.

Authors:  Huanping Dai; Christophe Micheyl
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  An evaluation of psychophysical models of auditory change perception.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Christian Kaernbach; Laurent Demany
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Likelihood ratio, optimal decision rules, and relationship between proportion correct and d' in the dual-pair AB-versus-BA identification paradigm.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Huanping Dai
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Pitch discrimination by ferrets for simple and complex sounds.

Authors:  Kerry M M Walker; Jan W H Schnupp; Sheelah M B Hart-Schnupp; Andrew J King; Jennifer K Bizley
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Is relative pitch specific to pitch?

Authors:  Josh H McDermott; Andriana J Lehr; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2008-12

10.  Signal detection in animal psychoacoustics: analysis and simulation of sensory and decision-related influences.

Authors:  A Alves-Pinto; J Sollini; C J Sumner
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 3.590

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.