Literature DB >> 3684479

Relative effectiveness of three stimulus variables for locating a moving sound source.

L D Rosenblum1, C Carello, R E Pastore.   

Abstract

A study is reported in which it is shown that observers can use at least three types of acoustic variables that indicate reliably when a moving sound source is passing: interaural temporal differences, the Doppler effect, and amplitude change. Each of these variables was presented in isolation and each was successful in indicating when a (stimulated) moving sound source passed an observer. These three variables were put into competition (with each indicating that closest passage occurred at a different time) in an effort to determine their relative importance. It was found that amplitude change dominated interaural temporal differences which, in turn, dominated the Doppler effect stimulus variable. The results are discussed in terms of two interpretations. First, it is possible that subjects based their judgements on the potential discriminability of each stimulus variable. However, because the stimuli used involved easily discriminable changes, subjects may instead have based their judgements on the independence of a stimulus variable from different environmental situation conditions. The dominance ordering obtained supports the second interpretation.

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3684479     DOI: 10.1068/p160175

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  20 in total

1.  Auditory looming perception in rhesus monkeys.

Authors:  Asif A Ghazanfar; John G Neuhoff; Nikos K Logothetis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-11-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The Doppler effect is not what you think it is: dramatic pitch change due to dynamic intensity change.

Authors:  Michael K McBeath; John G Neuhoff
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

3.  Common principle of guidance by echolocation and vision.

Authors:  D N Lee; F R van der Weel; T Hitchcock; E Matejowsky; J D Pettigrew
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Predicting the position of moving audiovisual stimuli.

Authors:  Steven L Prime; Laurence R Harris
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Changing-loudness aftereffects: slope of response functions and spectral dependence.

Authors:  A H Reinhardt-Rutland
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1997

6.  Cooperative vocal control in marmoset monkeys via vocal feedback.

Authors:  Jung Yoon Choi; Daniel Y Takahashi; Asif A Ghazanfar
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  The Life of Behavior.

Authors:  Alex Gomez-Marin; Asif A Ghazanfar
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 17.173

8.  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

9.  The effect of looming and receding sounds on the perceived in-depth orientation of depth-ambiguous biological motion figures.

Authors:  Ben Schouten; Nikolaus F Troje; Jean Vroomen; Karl Verfaillie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Audio-visual interactions for motion perception in depth modulate activity in visual area V3A.

Authors:  Akitoshi Ogawa; Emiliano Macaluso
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.