Literature DB >> 33379927

A test of model classes accounting for individual differences in the cocktail-party effect.

Robert A Lutfi1, Briana Rodriguez1, Jungmee Lee1, Torben Pastore2.   

Abstract

Listeners differ widely in the ability to follow the speech of a single talker in a noisy crowd-what is called the cocktail-party effect. Differences may arise for any one or a combination of factors associated with auditory sensitivity, selective attention, working memory, and decision making required for effective listening. The present study attempts to narrow the possibilities by grouping explanations into model classes based on model predictions for the types of errors that distinguish better from poorer performing listeners in a vowel segregation and talker identification task. Two model classes are considered: those for which the errors are predictably tied to the voice variation of talkers (decision weight models) and those for which the errors occur largely independently of this variation (internal noise models). Regression analyses of trial-by-trial responses, for different tasks and task demands, show overwhelmingly that the latter type of error is responsible for the performance differences among listeners. The results are inconsistent with models that attribute the performance differences to differences in the reliance listeners place on relevant voice features in this decision. The results are consistent instead with models for which largely stimulus-independent, stochastic processes cause information loss at different stages of auditory processing.

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33379927      PMCID: PMC7775115          DOI: 10.1121/10.0002961

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


  50 in total

1.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers.

Authors:  D S Brungart
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Within-ear and across-ear interference in a dichotic cocktail party listening task: effects of masker uncertainty.

Authors:  Douglas S Brungart; Brian D Simpson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Normal hearing tests: is a further appointment really necessary?

Authors:  Gaurav Kumar; Furrat Amen; Dev Roy
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Individual differences in auditory abilities.

Authors:  Gary R Kidd; Charles S Watson; Brian Gygi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  A new approach to sound source segregation.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Ching-Ju Liu; Christophe N J Stoelinga
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.622

6.  Observer efficiency and weights in a multiple observation task.

Authors:  B G Berg
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Effects of linguistic experience on the ability to benefit from temporal and spectral masker modulation.

Authors:  Lauren Calandruccio; Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 9.  Cortical and Sensory Causes of Individual Differences in Selective Attention Ability Among Listeners With Normal Hearing Thresholds.

Authors:  Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  Loud Music Exposure and Cochlear Synaptopathy in Young Adults: Isolated Auditory Brainstem Response Effects but No Perceptual Consequences.

Authors:  John H Grose; Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2017 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

View more
  2 in total

1.  Molecular analysis of individual differences in talker search at the cocktail-party.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Torben Pastore; Briana Rodriguez; William A Yost; Jungmee Lee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.482

2.  The Listener Effect in Multitalker Speech Segregation and Talker Identification.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Briana Rodriguez; Jungmee Lee
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.