Literature DB >> 3372867

Minimum audible movement angle as a function of signal frequency and the velocity of the source.

D R Perrott1, J Tucker.   

Abstract

Thresholds for the detection of the direction of travel of a moving sound source were determined in a single-interval, forced-choice paradigm. Both the rate at which the sound source is displaced (8 degrees-128 degrees/s) and the frequency of the signal to be localized (500-3700 Hz) affect dynamic spatial resolution. There is an inverse relationship between spatial resolution and the rate of travel, a finding that replicates an earlier observation on performance with sources displaced at high velocities [Perrott and Musicant, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 62, 1463-1466 (1977)]. However, the magnitude of this effect depends on the actual velocities employed. Relatively small changes in spatial resolution are apparent for velocities below approximately 32 degrees/s. The significant frequency effect can be summarized as follows: Dynamic spatial resolution is better for signals below 1000 Hz than for signals above this value (within the range tested). Particularly poor resolution is evident for signals between 1300-2000 Hz. The present results indicate that signal frequency affects dynamic spatial resolution in a fashion similar to that which has been observed in the more common "static" localization test situation. There is no indication of an interaction between these two variables. These results provide additional support for the hypothesis that both static and dynamic spatial discrimination functions are dependent upon the same underlying mechanisms. The effects of velocity upon the spatial resolution problem, a unique aspect of the dynamic paradigm, can probably be explained without the necessity of additional hypothetical mechanisms in the auditory system (e.g., a specialized motion detector).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3372867     DOI: 10.1121/1.395908

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


  8 in total

1.  Auditory psychomotor coordination and visual search performance.

Authors:  D R Perrott; K Saberi; K Brown; T Z Strybel
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-09

2.  Human sensitivity to differences in the rate of auditory cue change.

Authors:  Erin S Maloff; D Wesley Grantham; Daniel H Ashmead
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Auditory perception of motor vehicle travel paths.

Authors:  Daniel H Ashmead; D Wesley Grantham; Erin S Maloff; Benjamin Hornsby; Takabun Nakamura; Timothy J Davis; Faith Pampel; Erin G Rushing
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.888

4.  Spatial Release from Masking with a Moving Target.

Authors:  M Torben Pastore; William A Yost
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-12-20

5.  Auditory motion-specific mechanisms in the primate brain.

Authors:  Colline Poirier; Simon Baumann; Pradeep Dheerendra; Olivier Joly; David Hunter; Fabien Balezeau; Li Sun; Adrian Rees; Christopher I Petkov; Alexander Thiele; Timothy D Griffiths
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  The moving minimum audible angle is smaller during self motion than during source motion.

Authors:  W Owen Brimijoin; Michael A Akeroyd
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-02       Impact factor: 4.677

7.  Discrimination contours for moving sounds reveal duration and distance cues dominate auditory speed perception.

Authors:  Tom C A Freeman; Johahn Leung; Ella Wufong; Emily Orchard-Mills; Simon Carlile; David Alais
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Velocity Selective Networks in Human Cortex Reveal Two Functionally Distinct Auditory Motion Systems.

Authors:  Jhao-An Meng; Kourosh Saberi; I-Hui Hsieh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.