Literature DB >> 18681603

Tuning in the spatial dimension: evidence from a masked speech identification task.

Nicole Marrone1, Christine R Mason, Gerald Kidd.   

Abstract

Spatial release from masking was studied in a three-talker soundfield listening experiment. The target talker was presented at 0 degrees azimuth and the maskers were either colocated or symmetrically positioned around the target, with a different masker talker on each side. The symmetric placement greatly reduced any "better ear" listening advantage. When the maskers were separated from the target by +/-15 degrees , the average spatial release from masking was 8 dB. Wider separations increased the release to more than 12 dB. This large effect was eliminated when binaural cues and perceived spatial separation were degraded by covering one ear with an earplug and earmuff. Increasing reverberation in the room increased the target-to-masker ratio (TM) for the separated, but not colocated, conditions reducing the release from masking, although a significant advantage of spatial separation remained. Time reversing the masker speech improved performance in both the colocated and spatially separated cases but lowered TM the most for the colocated condition, also resulting in a reduction in the spatial release from masking. Overall, the spatial tuning observed appears to depend on the presence of interaural differences that improve the perceptual segregation of sources and facilitate the focus of attention at a point in space.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18681603      PMCID: PMC2809679          DOI: 10.1121/1.2945710

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


  45 in total

1.  Influence of spatial and temporal coding on auditory gap detection.

Authors:  A J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A speech corpus for multitalker communications research.

Authors:  R S Bolia; W T Nelson; M A Ericson; B D Simpson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech.

Authors:  R L Freyman; K S Helfer; D D McCall; R K Clifton
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Evidence for spatial tuning in informational masking using the probe-signal method.

Authors:  T L Arbogast; G Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Systematic distortions of auditory space perception following prolonged exposure to broadband noise.

Authors:  S Carlile; S Hyams; S Delaney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Spatial attention to central and peripheral auditory stimuli as indexed by event-related potentials.

Authors:  W A Teder-Sälejärvi; S A Hillyard; B Röder; H J Neville
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  1999-10-25

7.  Effects of temporal fine structure on the lateralization of speech and on speech understanding in noise.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jong Ho Won; Vasant K Dasika; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-02-27

8.  Transformation of sound pressure level from the free field to the eardrum in the horizontal plane.

Authors:  E A Shaw
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1974-12       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Response of binaural neurons of dog superior olivary complex to dichotic tonal stimuli: some physiological mechanisms of sound localization.

Authors:  J M Goldberg; P B Brown
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1969-07       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Functional classes of neurons in primary auditory cortex of the cat distinguished by sensitivity to sound location.

Authors:  J C Middlebrooks; J D Pettigrew
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  54 in total

1.  Influence of task-relevant and task-irrelevant feature continuity on selective auditory attention.

Authors:  Ross K Maddox; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-11-29

2.  How visual cues for when to listen aid selective auditory attention.

Authors:  Lenny A Varghese; Erol J Ozmeral; Virginia Best; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-02-11

3.  Exploring the benefit of auditory spatial continuity.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham; Erol J Ozmeral; Norbert Kopco
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Stimulus factors influencing spatial release from speech-on-speech masking.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Christine R Mason; Virginia Best; Nicole Marrone
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Spatial selective auditory attention in the presence of reverberant energy: individual differences in normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-12-03

6.  Application of an extended equalization-cancellation model to speech intelligibility with spatially distributed maskers.

Authors:  Rui Wan; Nathaniel I Durlach; H Steven Colburn
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Spatial release from masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners as a function of the temporal overlap of competing talkers.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The effects of hearing loss and age on the benefit of spatial separation between multiple talkers in reverberant rooms.

Authors:  Nicole Marrone; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Spatial release from masking as a function of the spectral overlap of competing talkers.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Eric R Thompson; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  A cocktail party model of spatial release from masking by both noise and speech interferers.

Authors:  Gary L Jones; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.