Literature DB >> 4056215

Effects of masker waveform and signal-to-masker phase relation on diotic and dichotic masking by reproducible noise.

R H Gilkey, D E Robinson, T E Hanna.   

Abstract

The proportions of hits and false alarms were estimated for the detection of a 500-Hz sinusoidal signal in each of 25, reproducible samples of wideband, white, Gaussian noise. The effects of signal phase were investigated under diotic (MoSo) and dichotic (MoS pi) conditions and compared to the predictions of two major models of binaural hearing. Averaging the data over samples obscured important across-sample and across-subject differences in performance. The proportions of hits and false alarms for individual noise samples presented under the MoSo condition were highly correlated with those for the same noise samples under the dichotic MoS pi condition, suggesting that the cues determining performance under these conditions are related. Signal-to-masker phase had a large effect on the proportion of hits under the MoSo condition, but only a small effect under the MoS pi condition. The Vector model predicts a large effect of signal phase under the MoS pi condition, and is, therefore, imcompatible with this aspect of the data. The expected value of the decision variable of the EC model is independent of signal phase. However, when the variance of the decision variable is also considered, the EC model does predict changes in the proportion of hits with the phase of the signal, comparable to those observed here. Further, it was shown that, if minor changes in the form of the EC model's decision variable or in the distribution of the internal noise parameters are assumed, the expected value of the decision variable also changes with the phase of the signal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4056215     DOI: 10.1121/1.392889

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


  10 in total

1.  Interaural fluctuations and the detection of interaural incoherence. IV. The effect of compression on stimulus statistics.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Predictions of diotic tone-in-noise detection based on a nonlinear optimal combination of energy, envelope, and fine-structure cues.

Authors:  Junwen Mao; Azadeh Vosoughi; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Diotic and dichotic detection with reproducible chimeric stimuli.

Authors:  Sean A Davidson; Robert H Gilkey; H Steven Colburn; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  An evaluation of models for diotic and dichotic detection in reproducible noises.

Authors:  Sean A Davidson; Robert H Gilkey; H Steven Colburn; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Cues for Diotic and Dichotic Detection of a 500-Hz Tone in Noise Vary with Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Junwen Mao; Kelly-Jo Koch; Karen A Doherty; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-05-15

6.  Tone-in-noise detection using envelope cues: comparison of signal-processing-based and physiological models.

Authors:  Junwen Mao; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-30

7.  Binaural detection with narrowband and wideband reproducible noise maskers. IV. Models using interaural time, level, and envelope differences.

Authors:  Junwen Mao; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Detection of tones in reproducible noise maskers by rabbits and comparison to detection by humans.

Authors:  Yan Gai; Laurel H Carney; Kristina S Abrams; Fabio Idrobo; J Michael Harrison; Robert H Gilkey
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-09-25

9.  Identifying cues for tone-in-noise detection using decision variable correlation in the budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus).

Authors:  Kenneth S Henry; Kassidy N Amburgey; Kristina S Abrams; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Contributions of intrinsic neural and stimulus variance to binaural sensitivity.

Authors:  Trevor M Shackleton; Alan R Palmer
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-10-12
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.