Auditory aftereffects of approaching and withdrawing sound sources: Dependence on the trajectory and location of adapting stimuli

Perception of approaching and withdrawing sound sources and their action on auditory aftereffects were studied in the free field. Motion of adapting stimuli was mimicked in two ways: (1) simultaneous opposite changes of amplitude of broadband noise impulses at two loudspeakers placed at 1.1 and 4.5 m from the listener; (2) an increase or a decrease of amplitude of broadband noise impulses in only one loudspeaker, the nearer or the remote one. Motion of test stimuli was mimicked in the former way. Listeners determined direction of the test stimuli motion without any adaptation (control) or after adaptation to stationary, slowly moving (with an amplitude change of 2 dB) and rapidly moving (amplitude change of 12 dB) stimuli. Percentages of “withdrawal” reports were used for construction of psychometric curves. Three phenomena of auditory perception were observed. In the absence of adaptation, a growing-louder effect was revealed, i.e., listeners reported more frequently the test sounds as the approaching ones. Once adapted to stationary or slowly moving stimuli, listeners showed a location-dependent aftereffect. Test stimuli were reported as withdrawing more often as compared with control. The effect was associated with the previous one and was weaker when the distance to the loudspeaker producing adapting stimuli was greater. After adaptation to rapidly moving stimuli, a motion aftereffect was revealed. In this case, listeners reported a direction of test stimuli motion as being opposite to that of adapting stimuli. The motion aftereffect was more pronounced when the adapting stimuli motion was mimicked in the former way, as this method allows estimation of their trajectory. There was no relationship between the motion aftereffect and the growing-louder effect, whichever way the adapting stimuli were produced. There was observed a tendency for reduction of aftereffects of approaching and for intensification of aftereffects of withdrawal with growing distance from source of adapting stimuli.

[1]  P. Coleman.  An analysis of cues to auditory depth perception in free space. , 1963, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Aage R. Møller,et al.  Basic Mechanisms in Hearing , 1973 .

[3]  I. A. Vartanian,et al.  TIME DEPENDENT FEATURES OF ADEQUATE SOUND STIMULI AND THE FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CENTRAL AUDITORY NEURONS , 1973 .

[4]  A. Small.  Loudness perception of signals of monotonically changing sound pressure. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  D. Grantham,et al.  Auditory motion aftereffects , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  L. Rosenblum,et al.  Relative Effectiveness of Three Stimulus Variables for Locating a Moving Sound Source , 1987, Perception.

[7]  D. M. Green,et al.  Sound localization by human listeners. , 1991, Annual review of psychology.

[8]  N. V. Swindale,et al.  Spectral motion produces an auditory after-effect , 1993, Nature.

[9]  A. Reinhardt-Rutland.  Asymmetrical perception of changing intensity in short tonal stimuli: duration of stimulus. , 1996, The Journal of general psychology.

[10]  W. Ehrenstein,et al.  The Growing-Louder Effect in Short Diotic Stimuli , 1996, Perceptual and motor skills.

[11]  S Buus,et al.  Temporal integration of loudness as a function of level. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  John G. Neuhoff,et al.  Perceptual bias for rising tones , 1998, Nature.

[13]  M. Cynader,et al.  The auditory motion aftereffect: its tuning and specificity in the spatial and frequency domains. , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  M. Cynader,et al.  The auditory motionaftereffect: Its tuning and specificity in the spatial and frequency domains , 2000 .

[15]  John G. Neuhoff,et al.  An Adaptive Bias in the Perception of Looming Auditory Motion , 2001 .

[16]  Xiaoqin Wang,et al.  Neural representations of temporally asymmetric stimuli in the auditory cortex of awake primates. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  A. Reinhardt-Rutland.  Perceptual asymmetries associated with changing-loudness aftereffects , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  J. A. Altman,et al.  Monaural and binaural perception of approaching and withdrawing auditory images in humans , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[19]  Asif A Ghazanfar,et al.  Multisensory Integration of Looming Signals by Rhesus Monkeys , 2004, Neuron.

[20]  Michael F. Neelon,et al.  The temporal growth and decay of the auditory motion aftereffect. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  M. Cynader,et al.  Neurons in cat primary auditory cortex sensitive to correlates of auditory motion in three-dimensional space , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  A Psychophysiological Study of Auditory Illusions of Approach and Withdrawal in the Context of the Perceptual Environment , 2007, The Spanish Journal of Psychology.

[23]  Klaus Scheffler,et al.  Rising sound intensity: an intrinsic warning cue activating the amygdala. , 2008, Cerebral cortex.

[24]  Neil W. Roach,et al.  Distortions of perceived auditory and visual space following adaptation to motion , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[25]  Erich Seifritz,et al.  Looming sounds as warning signals: the function of motion cues. , 2009, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.