Congruency effects with dynamic auditory stimuli: design implications

Since pitch is a commonly varied parameter in auditory displays, we investigated whether it is possible to attend to relative pitch while ignoring changes in pitch, and whether changes in pitch could be assessed independently of the overall pitch of a dynamic auditory stimulus. Stimuli were defined as either congruent (e.g., high pitch stimulus that became higher in pitch) or incongruent (e.g., high pitch stimulus that became lower in pitch). In this experiment, faster responses to congruent stimuli indicated a failure of selective attention. This effect was uniform for pitch judgments with all stimuli, but varied with the overall pitch for pitch-change judgments. The performance difference between congruent and incongruent trials was greatest for the extreme (high or low) stimuli. Moreover, pitch information intruded more into responses to pitch change than vice versa. Auditory display designers can use congruent stimuli to help distinguish between high and low pitches. If pitch change is the important dimension, designers should restrict the range over which stimulus pitches vary.

[1]  L E Marks,et al.  On cross-modal similarity: auditory-visual interactions in speeded discrimination. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  R W Proctor,et al.  Referential coding and attention-shifting accounts of the Simon effect , 1994, Psychological research.

[3]  B. Walker Congruency effects with dynamic auditory stimuli , 1997 .

[4]  J W Grau,et al.  The distinction between integral and separable dimensions: evidence for the integrality of pitch and loudness. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[5]  S. S. Stevens The Relation of Pitch to Intensity , 1935 .

[6]  S. S. Stevens On the psychophysical law. , 1957, Psychological review.

[7]  R Walker,et al.  The effects of culture, environment, age, and musical training on choices of visual metaphors for sound , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  L E Marks,et al.  Perceptual primacy of dimensions: support for a model of dimensional interaction. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  C. Michaels Destination compatibility, affordances, and coding rules: a reply to Proctor, Van Zandt, Lu, and Weeks. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  J R Simon,et al.  Processing symbolic information from a visual display: interference from an irrelevant directional cue. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[11]  C F Michaels,et al.  S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: evidence of the detection of affordances. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  W H Ehrenstein,et al.  The Simon effect and visual motion , 1994, Psychological research.

[13]  S. Mudd,et al.  SPATIAL STEREOTYPES OF FOUR DIMENSIONS OF PURE TONE. , 1963, Journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Auditory S-R compatibility: the effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[15]  L. Marks,et al.  Optional processes in similarity judgments , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  R. L. Deininger,et al.  S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  D J Weeks,et al.  Stimulus-response compatability for moving stimuli: perception of affordances or directional coding? , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  Max Schoen Introduction to the Psychology of Music , 1954 .

[19]  A. Hedge,et al.  The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. , 1975, Acta psychologica.

[20]  R. Proctor,et al.  The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  C. Michaels S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: Evidence of the detection of affordances. , 1988 .

[22]  J. R. Simon The Effects of an Irrelevant Directional CUE on Human Information Processing , 1990 .

[23]  Yvonne Lippa,et al.  A Referential coding Explanation for Compatibility Effects of Physically Orthogonal Stimulus and Response Dimensions , 1996 .

[24]  Greg Kramer,et al.  Mapping a Single Data Stream to Multiple Auditory Variables: A Subjective Approach to Creating a Compelling Design , 1996 .

[25]  P. Fitts,et al.  S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  Robert D. Melara,et al.  Interaction between synesthetically corresponding dimensions. , 1987 .

[27]  G. I. C. de Courcy,et al.  Introduction to the Psychology of Music , 1954 .

[28]  L. Marks Bright sneezes and dark coughs, loud sunlight and soft moonlight. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Robert O. Gjerdingen,et al.  The psychology of music , 2002 .