» Articles » PMID: 26233011

Auditory Attention Strategy Depends on Target Linguistic Properties and Spatial Configuration

Overview
Journal J Acoust Soc Am
Date 2015 Aug 3
PMID 26233011
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Whether crossing a busy intersection or attending a large dinner party, listeners sometimes need to attend to multiple spatially distributed sound sources or streams concurrently. How they achieve this is not clear-some studies suggest that listeners cannot truly simultaneously attend to separate streams, but instead combine attention switching with short-term memory to achieve something resembling divided attention. This paper presents two oddball detection experiments designed to investigate whether directing attention to phonetic versus semantic properties of the attended speech impacts listeners' ability to divide their auditory attention across spatial locations. Each experiment uses four spatially distinct streams of monosyllabic words, variation in cue type (providing phonetic or semantic information), and requiring attention to one or two locations. A rapid button-press response paradigm is employed to minimize the role of short-term memory in performing the task. Results show that differences in the spatial configuration of attended and unattended streams interact with linguistic properties of the speech streams to impact performance. Additionally, listeners may leverage phonetic information to make oddball detection judgments even when oddballs are semantically defined. Both of these effects appear to be mediated by the overall complexity of the acoustic scene.

Citing Articles

Cat-astrophic effects of sudden interruptions on spatial auditory attention.

Liang W, Brown C, Shinn-Cunningham B J Acoust Soc Am. 2022; 151(5):3219.

PMID: 35649920 PMC: 9113758. DOI: 10.1121/10.0010453.


Auditory attention switching with listening difficulty: Behavioral and pupillometric measures.

McCloy D, Larson E, Lee A J Acoust Soc Am. 2018; 144(5):2764.

PMID: 30522295 PMC: 6232045. DOI: 10.1121/1.5078618.


Pupillometry shows the effort of auditory attention switching.

McCloy D, Lau B, Larson E, Pratt K, Lee A J Acoust Soc Am. 2017; 141(4):2440.

PMID: 28464660 PMC: 5848839. DOI: 10.1121/1.4979340.


Informational Masking in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners Measured in a Nonspeech Pattern Identification Task.

Roverud E, Best V, Mason C, Swaminathan J, Kidd Jr G Trends Hear. 2016; 20.

PMID: 27059627 PMC: 4871212. DOI: 10.1177/2331216516638516.

References
1.
Lawrence M, Klein R . Isolating exogenous and endogenous modes of temporal attention. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012; 142(2):560-72. DOI: 10.1037/a0029023. View

2.
Calandruccio L, Brouwer S, Van Engen K, Dhar S, Bradlow A . Masking release due to linguistic and phonetic dissimilarity between the target and masker speech. Am J Audiol. 2013; 22(1):157-64. PMC: 3694489. DOI: 10.1044/1059-0889(2013/12-0072). View

3.
Iyer N, Brungart D, Simpson B . Effects of target-masker contextual similarity on the multimasker penalty in a three-talker diotic listening task. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010; 128(5):2998-10. DOI: 10.1121/1.3479547. View

4.
Sheu C, Lee Y, Shih P . Analyzing recognition performance with sparse data. Behav Res Methods. 2008; 40(3):722-7. DOI: 10.3758/brm.40.3.722. View

5.
Ihlefeld A, Shinn-Cunningham B . Spatial release from energetic and informational masking in a divided speech identification task. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008; 123(6):4380-92. PMC: 9014250. DOI: 10.1121/1.2904825. View