Literature DB >> 6222147

Backward masking, the suffix effect, and preperceptual storage.

H J Kallman, D W Massaro.   

Abstract

This article considers the use of auditory backward recognition masking (ABRM) and stimulus suffix experiments as indexes of preperceptual auditory storage. In the first part of the article, two ABRM experiments that failed to demonstrate a mask disinhibition effect found previously in stimulus suffix experiments are reported. The failure to demonstrate mask disinhibition is inconsistent with an explanation of ABRM in terms of lateral inhibition. In the second part of the article, evidence is presented to support the conclusion that the suffix effect involves the contributions of later processing stages and does not provide an uncontaminated index of preperceptual storage. In contrast, it is claimed that ABRM experiments provide the most direct index of the temporal course of perceptual recognition. Partial-report tasks and other paradigms are also evaluated in terms of their contributions to an understanding of preperceptual auditory storage. Differences between interruption and integration masking are discussed along with the role of preperceptual auditory storage in speech perception.

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6222147     DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.9.2.312

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  11 in total

1.  Perceptual interference decays over short unfilled intervals.

Authors:  M D Schulkind
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-09

2.  Time course of chord priming.

Authors:  H G Tekman; J J Bharucha
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1992-01

3.  Repetition priming in an auditory lexical decision task: effects of lexical status.

Authors:  M Mimura; M Verfaellie; W P Milberg
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-11

4.  The effects of unmodulated carrier fringes on the detection of frequency modulation.

Authors:  Andrew J Byrne; Neal F Viemeister; Mark A Stellmack
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Auditory backward recognition masking: effect of interaural phase on masker efficacy.

Authors:  R D Shilling; D R Soderquist
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-04

6.  Recognition masking of auditory duration.

Authors:  H J Kallman; S C Hirtle; D Davidson
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1986-07

7.  Ear of input as a determinant of pitch-memory interference.

Authors:  H J Kallman; P A Cameron; J W Beckstead; E Joyce
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1987-09

8.  Voice change in the stimulus suffix effect: are the effects structural or strategic?

Authors:  S N Greenberg; R W Engle
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1983-09

9.  Stimulus-based versus performance-based measurement of auditory backward recognition masking.

Authors:  D C Foyle; C S Watson
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1984-12

10.  Backward recognition masking as a function of ear of mask presentation.

Authors:  H J Kallman; M D Morris
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1984-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.