Literature DB >> 19170484

Adaptive sex differences in auditory motion perception: looming sounds are special.

John G Neuhoff1, Rianna Planisek, Erich Seifritz.   

Abstract

In 4 experiments, the authors examined sex differences in audiospatial perception of sounds that moved toward and away from the listener. Experiment 1 showed that both men and women underestimated the time-to-arrival of full-cue looming sounds. However, this perceptual bias was significantly stronger among women than among men. In Experiment 2, listeners estimated the terminal distance of sounds that approached but stopped before reaching them. Women perceived the looming sounds as closer than did men. However, in Experiment 3, with greater statistical power, the authors found no sex difference in the perceived distance of sounds that traveled away from the listener, demonstrating a sex-based specificity for auditory looming perception. Experiment 4 confirmed these results using equidistant looming and receding sounds. The findings suggest that sex differences in auditory looming perception are not due to general differences in audiospatial ability, but rather illustrate the environmental salience and evolutionary importance of perceiving looming objects. Copyright 2009 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19170484     DOI: 10.1037/a0013159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  15 in total

1.  Effects of cognitive load and type of object on the visual looming bias.

Authors:  Austen McGuire; Ali Ciersdorff; Omri Gillath; Michael Vitevitch
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-03-09       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  How do vision and hearing impact pedestrian time-to-arrival judgments?

Authors:  JulieAnne M Roper; Shirin E Hassan
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.973

3.  Frontal cortex selectively overrides auditory processing to bias perception for looming sonic motion.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Mark H Myers
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.252

Review 4.  Estrogenic modulation of auditory processing: a vertebrate comparison.

Authors:  Melissa L Caras
Journal:  Front Neuroendocrinol       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 8.606

5.  Evidence for impaired sound intensity processing in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Dominik R Bach; Karin Buxtorf; Werner K Strik; John G Neuhoff; Erich Seifritz
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2009-09-03       Impact factor: 9.306

6.  Asymmetries in behavioral and neural responses to spectral cues demonstrate the generality of auditory looming bias.

Authors:  Robert Baumgartner; Darrin K Reed; Brigitta Tóth; Virginia Best; Piotr Majdak; H Steven Colburn; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Compression of auditory space during forward self-motion.

Authors:  Wataru Teramoto; Shuichi Sakamoto; Fumimasa Furune; Jiro Gyoba; Yôiti Suzuki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Further explorations of the facing bias in biological motion perception: perspective cues, observer sex, and response times.

Authors:  Ben Schouten; Alex Davila; Karl Verfaillie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Sustained Magnetic Responses in Temporal Cortex Reflect Instantaneous Significance of Approaching and Receding Sounds.

Authors:  Dominik R Bach; Nicholas Furl; Gareth Barnes; Raymond J Dolan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Young Women do it Better: Sexual Dimorphism in Temporal Discrimination.

Authors:  Laura Jane Williams; John S Butler; Anna Molloy; Eavan McGovern; Ines Beiser; Okka Kimmich; Brendan Quinlivan; Sean O'Riordan; Michael Hutchinson; Richard B Reilly
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.