Tuning in the spatial dimension: evidence from a masked speech identification task.

Spatial release from masking was studied in a three-talker soundfield listening experiment. The target talker was presented at 0 degrees azimuth and the maskers were either colocated or symmetrically positioned around the target, with a different masker talker on each side. The symmetric placement greatly reduced any "better ear" listening advantage. When the maskers were separated from the target by +/-15 degrees , the average spatial release from masking was 8 dB. Wider separations increased the release to more than 12 dB. This large effect was eliminated when binaural cues and perceived spatial separation were degraded by covering one ear with an earplug and earmuff. Increasing reverberation in the room increased the target-to-masker ratio (TM) for the separated, but not colocated, conditions reducing the release from masking, although a significant advantage of spatial separation remained. Time reversing the masker speech improved performance in both the colocated and spatially separated cases but lowered TM the most for the colocated condition, also resulting in a reduction in the spatial release from masking. Overall, the spatial tuning observed appears to depend on the presence of interaural differences that improve the perceptual segregation of sources and facilitate the focus of attention at a point in space.

[1]  R Plomp,et al.  Effect of multiple speechlike maskers on binaural speech recognition in normal and impaired hearing. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Virginia Best,et al.  The influence of spatial separation on divided listening. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  P J Bailey,et al.  A probe-signal study of auditory discrimination of complex tones. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Directivity of binaural noise reduction in spatial multiple noise-source arrangements for normal and impaired listeners. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  B C Moore,et al.  Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  G. Kidd,et al.  The effect of spatial separation on informational and energetic masking of speech. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  R. Patterson,et al.  The deterioration of hearing with age: frequency selectivity, the critical ratio, the audiogram, and speech threshold. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  William Noble,et al.  Hearing speech against spatially separate competing speech versus competing noise , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  D L Neff,et al.  Individual differences in simultaneous masking with random-frequency, multicomponent maskers. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  J. C. Middlebrooks,et al.  Functional classes of neurons in primary auditory cortex of the cat distinguished by sensitivity to sound location , 1981, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[12]  G. Kidd,et al.  Evidence for spatial tuning in informational masking using the probe-signal method. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  John C Middlebrooks,et al.  Spatial sensitivity in field PAF of cat auditory cortex. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  S. Carlile,et al.  Systematic distortions of auditory space perception following prolonged exposure to broadband noise. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  D. P. Phillips,et al.  Azimuthal tuning of human perceptual channels for sound location. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  T. Yin,et al.  Binaural interaction in low-frequency neurons in inferior colliculus of the cat. III. Effects of changing frequency. , 1983, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  D S Brungart,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Stuart Gatehouse,et al.  Perceptual segregation of competing speech sounds: the role of spatial location. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Effects of Temporal Fine Structure on the Lateralization of Speech and on Speech Understanding in Noise , 2007, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[20]  E. Shaw Transformation of sound pressure level from the free field to the eardrum in the horizontal plane. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  K S Helfer,et al.  Aging and the binaural advantage in reverberation and noise. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  John F. Culling,et al.  Effects of reverberation on perceptual segregation of competing voices , 2003 .

[23]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Influence of spatial and temporal coding on auditory gap detection. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Robert A. A. Campbell,et al.  Physiological and behavioral studies of spatial coding in the auditory cortex , 2007, Hearing Research.

[25]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The role of head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  W. T. Nelson,et al.  A speech corpus for multitalker communications research. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  C Tsuchitani,et al.  The inhibition of cat lateral superior olive unit excitatory responses to binaural tone bursts. I. The transient chopper response. , 1988, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  S. Hillyard,et al.  The gradient of spatial auditory attention in free field: An event-related potential study , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Virginia Best,et al.  Spatial unmasking of birdsong in human listeners: energetic and informational factors. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Virginia M Richards,et al.  Informational masking with small set sizes. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  J. Goldberg,et al.  Response of binaural neurons of dog superior olivary complex to dichotic tonal stimuli: some physiological mechanisms of sound localization. , 1969, Journal of neurophysiology.

[32]  Frederick J. Gallun,et al.  The advantage of knowing where to listen. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  R L Freyman,et al.  The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  Liang Li,et al.  Does the information content of an irrelevant source differentially affect spoken word recognition in younger and older adults? , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[35]  B A Wright,et al.  Detection of sinusoidal amplitude modulation at unexpected rates. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  B. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Informational masking: counteracting the effects of stimulus uncertainty by decreasing target-masker similarity. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  W. Larkin,et al.  Frequency-response characteristic of auditory observers detecting signals of a single frequency in noise: the probe-signal method. , 1968, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  T. Yin,et al.  Interaural time sensitivity in medial superior olive of cat. , 1990, Journal of neurophysiology.

[39]  Wouter A Dreschler,et al.  Release from informational masking by time reversal of native and non-native interfering speech. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Klaus Hartung,et al.  Spatial tuning to virtual sounds in the inferior colliculus of the guinea pig. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[41]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Spatial attention to central and peripheral auditory stimuli as indexed by event-related potentials. , 1999, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[42]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: effect of location and type of interferer. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  B A Wright,et al.  Detection of unexpected tones with short and long durations. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  C. Mason,et al.  Release from masking due to spatial separation of sources in the identification of nonspeech auditory patterns. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.