Literature DB >> 3429732

Comodulation masking release (CMR): effects of signal frequency, flanking-band frequency, masker bandwidth, flanking-band level, and monotic versus dichotic presentation of the flanking band.

G P Schooneveldt1, B C Moore.   

Abstract

In experiment I, thresholds for 400-ms sinusoidal signals were measured in the presence of a continuous 25-Hz-wide noise centered at signal frequencies (fs) ranging from 250 to 8000 Hz in 1-oct steps. The masker was presented either alone or together with a second continuous 25-Hz-wide band of noise (the flanking band) whose envelope was either correlated with that of the on-frequency band or was uncorrelated; its center frequency ranged from 0.5 fs to 1.5 fs. The flanking band was presented either in the same ear (monotic condition) as the signal plus masker or in the opposite ear (dichotic condition). The on-frequency band and the flanking band each had an overall level of 67 dB SPL. The comodulation masking release, CMR (U-C), is defined as the difference between the thresholds for the uncorrelated and correlated conditions. The CMR (U-C) showed two components: a broadly tuned component, occurring at all signal frequencies and all flanking-band frequencies, and occurring for both monotic and dichotic conditions; and a component restricted to the monotic condition and to flanking-band frequencies close to fs. This sharply tuned component was small for low signal frequencies, increased markedly at 2000 and 4000 Hz, and decreased at 8000 Hz. Experiment II showed that the sharply tuned component of the CMR (U-C) was slightly reduced in magnitude when the level of the flanking band was 10 dB above that of the on-frequency band and was markedly reduced when the level was 10 dB below, whereas the broadly tuned component and the dichotic CMR (U-C) were only slightly affected. Experiment III showed that the sharply tuned component of the CMR (U-C) was markedly reduced when the bandwidths of the on-frequency and flanking bands were increased to 100 Hz, while the broadly tuned component and the dichotic CMR (U-C) decreased only slightly. The argument here is that the sharply tuned component of the monotic CMR (U-C) results from beating between the "carrier" frequencies of the two masker bands. This introduces periodic zeros in the masker envelope, which facilitate signal detection. The broadly tuned component, which is probably a "true" CMR, was only about 3 dB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3429732     DOI: 10.1121/1.395639

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


  34 in total

1.  Physiological correlates of comodulation masking release in the mammalian ventral cochlear nucleus.

Authors:  D Pressnitzer; R Meddis; R Delahaye; I M Winter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  The effect of amplitude comodulation on auditory object formation in sentence perception.

Authors:  T D Carrell; J M Opie
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1992-10

Review 3.  The psychophysics and physiology of comodulation masking release.

Authors:  Jesko L Verhey; Daniel Pressnitzer; Ian M Winter
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-09-09       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Spatial cues alone produce inaccurate sound segregation: the effect of interaural time differences.

Authors:  Andrew Schwartz; Josh H McDermott; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Spectral profile cues in comodulation masking release.

Authors:  Emily Buss
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Detection of spectrally complex signals in comodulated maskers: effect of temporal fringe.

Authors:  John H Grose; Joseph W Hall; Emily Buss; Debora R Hatch
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Binaural comodulation masking release: effects of masker interaural correlation.

Authors:  Joseph W Hall; Emily Buss; John H Grose
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Auditory stream formation affects comodulation masking release retroactively.

Authors:  Torsten Dau; Stephan Ewert; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Spectral integration under conditions of comodulation masking release.

Authors:  Emily Buss; John H Grose
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Within- and across-channel factors in the multiband comodulation masking release paradigm.

Authors:  John H Grose; Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.