Literature DB >> 6853836

Growth of forward masking for sinusoidal and noise maskers as a function of signal delay; implications for suppression in noise.

B C Moore, B R Glasberg.   

Abstract

The first two experiments were designed to determine whether mutual suppression in broadband noise increases in strength with increasing overall level. In experiment I masking functions (signal threshold versus masker level) were measured in forward masking as a function of the delay time of a 10-ms signal, both for a broadband noise masker (low-pass filtered at 8 kHz) and for sinusoidal maskers at 1, 2 and 4 kHz. In the latter case the signal frequency equaled the masker frequency. For short signal delays the masking functions were steeper for the sinusoidal masker than for the noise masker. At longer delays the slopes for both masker types decreased and the slopes for the two masker types became more nearly equal. In experiment II we investigated the effect of gating a low-level noise cue with the sinusoidal masker. At the longer signal delays the masking functions had equal slopes for the broadband noise masker and the sinusoidal masker with cue. At short signal delays the masking functions for sinusoidal maskers may be "artificially" steepened, since the subject lacks an effective cue to distinguish the signal from the masker. The equal slopes at longer delays indicate that mutual suppression of the components within a broadband noise does not increase in strength with increasing overall level. In experiment III we attempted to estimate the magnitude of mutual suppression in a broadband noise by comparing masking functions for a broadband noise and for a noise whose bandwidth was 20% of the center frequency. The suppression was estimated to be about 2 dB at 4 kHz and 8 dB at 2 kHz. A simple mathematical expression, suggested by Jesteadt et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 71, 950-962 (1982)], was found to give an accurate description of the amount of masking produced by the broadband masker as a function of masker level and signal delay.

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6853836     DOI: 10.1121/1.389273

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


  10 in total

1.  Contextual effects in the identification of nonspeech auditory patterns.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Virginia M Richards; Timothy Streeter; Christine R Mason; Rong Huang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  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

3.  Integration of auditory and vibrotactile stimuli: effects of phase and stimulus-onset asynchrony.

Authors:  E Courtenay Wilson; Charlotte M Reed; Louis D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Spatial and temporal disparity in signals and maskers affects signal detection in non-human primates.

Authors:  Francesca Rocchi; Margit E Dylla; Peter A Bohlen; Ramnarayan Ramachandran
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Forward masking estimated by signal detection theory analysis of neuronal responses in primary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Ana Alves-Pinto; Sylvie Baudoux; Alan R Palmer; Christian J Sumner
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-04-06

6.  Wide-dynamic-range forward suppression in marmoset inferior colliculus neurons is generated centrally and accounts for perceptual masking.

Authors:  Paul C Nelson; Zachary M Smith; Eric D Young
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Otoacoustic emission theories and behavioral estimates of human basilar membrane motion are mutually consistent.

Authors:  Enrique A Lopez-Poveda; Peter T Johannesen
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-06-13

8.  The impact of preceding noise on the frequency tuning of rat auditory cortex neurons.

Authors:  Yinting Peng; Pengpeng Xing; Juan He; Xinde Sun; Jiping Zhang
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 3.288

9.  Thalamic gating contributes to forward suppression in the auditory cortex.

Authors:  Colin Xiong; Xiuping Liu; Lingzhi Kong; Jun Yan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Stream segregation in the perception of sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones.

Authors:  Lena-Vanessa Dolležal; Rainer Beutelmann; Georg M Klump
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.