Literature DB >> 8046139

Reducing informational masking by sound segregation.

G Kidd1, C R Mason, P S Deliwala, W S Woods, H S Colburn.   

Abstract

Informational masking was reduced using three stimulus presentation schemes that were intended to perceptually segregate the signal from the masker. The maskers were sets of sinusoids chosen randomly in frequency and intensity on each stimulus interval or, in some conditions, on every masker burst in a series of bursts within intervals. Masker components were excluded from the frequency region surrounding the 1000-Hz signal to minimize the energetic masking. Masked thresholds as great as 60-70 dB above quiet threshold were observed for some subjects in some conditions. It was shown that this informational masking could be reduced as much as 40 dB by: (1) presenting the masker to both ears and signal to one ear; (2) playing different masker samples sequentially in each interval of every trial; or (3) presenting the signal in alternate bursts of multiple, identical masker samples. For the binaural manipulation, informational masking was reduced because the masker and signal were perceived as originating from different interaural locations. In the latter two manipulations, a difference in the spectral or temporal pattern of the signal and masker provided the detection cue. These effects were interpreted as evidence of the importance of perceptual segregation of sounds in noisy listening environments where signal reception is not limited by energetic masking.

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8046139     DOI: 10.1121/1.410023

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


  86 in total

1.  Psychometric functions for informational masking.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Doris J Kistler; Michael R Callahan; Frederic L Wightman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  How visual cues for when to listen aid selective auditory attention.

Authors:  Lenny A Varghese; Erol J Ozmeral; Virginia Best; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-02-11

3.  Spatial cues alone produce inaccurate sound segregation: the effect of interaural time differences.

Authors:  Andrew Schwartz; Josh H McDermott; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Objective and subjective psychophysical measures of auditory stream integration and segregation.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-07-24

5.  Speech-on-speech masking with variable access to the linguistic content of the masker speech.

Authors:  Lauren Calandruccio; Sumitrajit Dhar; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Excitation-based and informational masking of a tonal signal in a four-tone masker.

Authors:  Lori J Leibold; Jack J Hitchens; Emily Buss; Donna L Neff
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Recovering sound sources from embedded repetition.

Authors:  Josh H McDermott; David Wrobleski; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-01-03       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Auditory streaming of tones of uncertain frequency, level, and duration.

Authors:  An-Chieh Chang; Robert A Lutfi; Jungmee Lee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Precedence based speech segregation in bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Shaikat Hossain; Vahid Montazeri; Peter F Assmann; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Children's perception of speech produced in a two-talker background.

Authors:  Mallory Baker; Emily Buss; Adam Jacks; Crystal Taylor; Lori J Leibold
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.