Literature DB >> 4078173

Stimulus parameters governing confusion effects in forward masking.

D L Neff.   

Abstract

In forward masking, performance may be affected by confusion, that is, by the difficulty of discriminating a suprathreshold signal from the preceding masker. This study investigated confusion effects for forward maskers composed of repeated bursts of a 100-Hz sinusoid followed by sinusoidal signals; such "pulsing" maskers produce confusion when the properties of the signal are identical to those of an individual masker "pulse." The level, frequency, and duration of the signal relative to an individual masker pulse, as well as offset-onset delay, were varied to determine the minimum change necessary to eliminate confusion. For maskers composed of 20-ms pulses, confusion was eliminated by changes in signal level of 5 dB or changes in signal frequency of 30 to 40 Hz. For maskers composed of 10-, 20-, or 40-ms pulses, confusion was eliminated by signal delays of 8 to 16 ms or by signal durations less than half or greater than twice the masker-pulse duration. Results with adaptive procedures designed to measure confusion-free or confusion-determined thresholds suggest that confusion effects can be minimized or avoided by extensive listener training with a procedure in which the signal and masker are not presented at similar intensities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4078173     DOI: 10.1121/1.392653

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


  15 in total

1.  The effect of narrow-band noise maskers on increment detection.

Authors:  Jessica J Messersmith; Harisadhan Patra; Walt Jesteadt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Psychophysical estimates of nonlinear cochlear processing in younger and older listeners.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Masking by inaudible sounds and the linearity of temporal summation.

Authors:  Christopher J Plack; Andrew J Oxenham; Vit Drga
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-08-23       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Exploring the source of the mid-level hump for intensity discrimination in quiet and the effects of noise.

Authors:  Elin Roverud; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Recovery from forward masking in cochlear implant listeners depends on stimulation mode, level, and electrode location.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Aditya M Kulkarni
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Otoacoustic estimation of cochlear tuning: validation in the chinchilla.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-05-04

7.  Masking of short tones in noise: Evidence for envelope-based, rather than energy-based detection.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Jessica Chen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant listeners under forward masking conditions.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Aditya M Kulkarni
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Comparing different estimates of cochlear compression in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.

Authors:  Peninah S Rosengard; Andrew J Oxenham; Louis D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.