Level Dominance in Sound Source Identification

Overview

Journal J Acoust Soc Am

Publisher American Institute of Physics

Specialty Otorhinolaryngology

Date 2009 Feb 12

PMID 19206804

Citations 14

Authors

Robert A Lutfi

Ching-Ju Liu

Christophe Stoelinga

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Impact sounds were synthesized according to standard textbook equations given for the motion of simply supported, metal plates. In a two-interval, forced-choice procedure, highly practiced listeners identified from these sounds a predefined class of target plates based on their particular material and geometric properties. The effects of two factors on identification were examined: the relative level of partials comprising the sounds and the relative amount of information (given as the difference in d(')) each partial provided for identification. In different conditions one factor was fixed while the other either increased or decreased with frequency. The effect on listener identification in each case was determined from a logistic discriminant analysis of trial-by-trial responses, yielding a vector of listener decision weights on the frequency and decay of individual partials. The weights increased proportionally with relative level, but were largely uninfluenced by relative information content--a result exactly opposite to that expected from a maximum-likelihood observer. The dominant effect of relative level was replicated for other sound sources (clamped bars and stretched membranes) and was not diminished by randomizing the relative level of partials across trials. The results are taken to underscore the importance of relative level in the identification of rudimentary sound sources.

Citing Articles

High-resolution temporal weighting of interaural time differences in speech.

Baltzell L, Best V J Acoust Soc Am. 2021; 150(2):1311.

PMID: 34470281 PMC: 8561715. DOI: 10.1121/10.0005934.

The Louder, the Longer: Object Length Perception Is Influenced by Loudness, but Not by Pitch.

Hauck P, Hecht H Vision (Basel). 2019; 3(4).

PMID: 31735858 PMC: 6969925. DOI: 10.3390/vision3040057.

Level dominance effect and selective attention in a dichotic sample discrimination task.

Tan A, Berg B J Acoust Soc Am. 2018; 143(4):2119.

PMID: 29716301 PMC: 6909989. DOI: 10.1121/1.5030919.

A Detection-Theoretic Analysis of Auditory Streaming and Its Relation to Auditory Masking.

Chang A, Lutfi R, Lee J, Heo I Trends Hear. 2016; 20.

PMID: 27641681 PMC: 5029798. DOI: 10.1177/2331216516664343.

L-type calcium channels refine the neural population code of sound level.

Grimsley C, Green D, Sivaramakrishnan S J Neurophysiol. 2016; 116(6):2550-2563.

PMID: 27605536 PMC: 5133292. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00657.2016.

References

WALLACH H, Newman E, ROSENZWEIG M . The precedence effect in sound localization. Am J Psychol. 1949; 62(3):315-36. View

Lutfi R . A model of auditory pattern analysis based on component-relative-entropy. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993; 94(2 Pt 1):748-58. DOI: 10.1121/1.408204. View

Litovsky R, Colburn H, Yost W, Guzman S . The precedence effect. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999; 106(4 Pt 1):1633-54. DOI: 10.1121/1.427914. View

Neff D, Dethlefs T . Individual differences in simultaneous masking with random-frequency, multicomponent maskers. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995; 98(1):125-34. DOI: 10.1121/1.413748. View

Jesteadt W, Bacon S, Lehman J . Forward masking as a function of frequency, masker level, and signal delay. J Acoust Soc Am. 1982; 71(4):950-62. DOI: 10.1121/1.387576. View

Schlauch R, Ries D, DiGiovanni J . Duration discrimination and subjective duration for ramped and damped sounds. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 109(6):2880-7. DOI: 10.1121/1.1372913. View

Moore B, Ohgushi K . Audibility of partials in inharmonic complex tones. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993; 93(1):452-61. DOI: 10.1121/1.405625. View

Turner M, Berg B . Temporal limits of level dominance in a sample discrimination task (L). J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 121(4):1848-51. DOI: 10.1121/1.2710345. View

Viemeister N . Intensity discrimination of pulsed sinusoids: the effects of filtered noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1972; 51(4):1265-9. DOI: 10.1121/1.1912970. View

10.

Lutfi R, Oh E, Storm E, Alexander J . Classification and identification of recorded and synthesized impact sounds by practiced listeners, musicians, and nonmusicians. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005; 118(1):393-404. DOI: 10.1121/1.1931867. View

11.

Lutfi R, Liu C . Individual differences in source identification from synthesized impact sounds. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 122(2):1017-28. DOI: 10.1121/1.2751269. View

12.

Lutfi R, Oh E . Auditory discrimination of material changes in a struck-clamped bar. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 102(6):3647-56. DOI: 10.1121/1.420151. View

13.

Oh E, Lutfi R . Nonmonotonicity of informational masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 104(6):3489-99. DOI: 10.1121/1.423932. View

14.

Wier C, Jesteadt W, Green D . Frequency discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977; 61(1):178-84. DOI: 10.1121/1.381251. View

15.

Lutfi R, Kistler D, Oh E, Wightman F, Callahan M . One factor underlies individual differences in auditory informational masking within and across age groups. Percept Psychophys. 2003; 65(3):396-406. PMC: 2819167. DOI: 10.3758/bf03194571. View

16.

Neff D, Jesteadt W . Intensity discrimination in the presence of random-frequency, multicomponent maskers and broadband noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996; 100(4 Pt 1):2289-98. DOI: 10.1121/1.417938. View

17.

Jesteadt W, Wier C, Green D . Intensity discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977; 61(1):169-77. DOI: 10.1121/1.381278. View

18.

McAdams S, Chaigne A, Roussarie V . The psychomechanics of simulated sound sources: material properties of impacted bars. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004; 115(3):1306-20. DOI: 10.1121/1.1645855. View

19.

Kidd G, Watson C . The "proportion-of-the-total-duration rule" for the discrimination of auditory patterns. J Acoust Soc Am. 1992; 92(6):3109-18. DOI: 10.1121/1.404207. View

20.

Blauert J . Localization and the law of the first wavefront in the median plane. J Acoust Soc Am. 1971; 50(2):466-70. DOI: 10.1121/1.1912663. View