It is a psychological commonplace to say that information coming from one eye m be fused with different information from the other eye to give a single visual wor I n hearing, however, i t is usual for the stimuli reaching the two ears to be closely simil; Differences in intensity or time of arrival a t the ears may indeed produce a perception localisation (Stevens & Sewman, 1936) or the rather different precedeiice effect used stereophonic reproduction (Wallach, Xewman & Rosenzweig, 1949) ; but there is lit reported comparable to, say, the filling up of the blind spot in one eye by informati received through the other. The tendency of recent research has been in fact (Cheri 1953 ; Broadbent, 1954 j to emphasise the cases in which, when different stimuli arri a t the two ears, the information on one ear is lost more or less conipletely while the otl ear controls response. The writer observed recently, however, that if a speaking voice is heard through t head-phones, with a filter eliminating the low frequency components on one ear a another eliminating the high frequeiicy components on the other ear, a considerable degi of fusion is found. Eighteen research workers have been used as observers, four of thc being previously aware of the nature of the stimulns.
[1]
D. R. McAuliffe,et al.
Some Observations on Pitch and Frequency
,
1951
.
[2]
Hans Wallach,et al.
The precedence effect in sound localization.
,
1949,
The American journal of psychology.
[3]
D. Broadbent.
The role of auditory localization in attention and memory span.
,
1954,
Journal of experimental psychology.
[4]
E. C. Cherry.
Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears
,
1953
.
[5]
H DAVIS,et al.
Information theory. 3. Applications of information theory to research in hearing.
,
1952,
The Journal of speech disorders.
[6]
R. C. Mathes,et al.
Phase Effects in Monaural Perception
,
1947
.
[7]
E. B. Newman,et al.
The localization of actual sources of sound.
,
1936
.