Distractor clustering enhances detection speed and accuracy during selective listening

The effects of distractor clustering on target detection were examined in two experiments in which subjects attended to binaural tone bursts of one frequency while ignoring distracting tones of two competing frequencies. The subjects pressed a button in response to occasional target tones of longer duration (Experiment 1) or increased loudness (Experiment 2). In evenly spaced conditions, attended and distractor frequencies differed by 6 and 12 semitones, respectively (e.g., 2096-Hz targets vs. 1482- and 1048-Hz distractors). In clustered conditions, distractor frequencies were grouped; attended tones differed from the distractors by 6 and 7 semitones, respectively (e.g., 2096-Hz targets vs. 1482- and 1400-Hz distractors). The tones were presented in randomized sequences at fixed or random stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). In both experiments, clustering of the unattended frequencies improved the detectability of targets and speeded target reaction times, Similar effects were found at fixed and variable SO As. Results from the analysis of stimulus sequence suggest that clustering improved performance primarily by reducing the interference caused by distractors that immediately preceded the target.

[1]  A. Bregman,et al.  Effect of silence between tones on auditory stream segregation. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  D. Woods The physiological basis of selective attention: Implications of event-related potential studies. , 1990 .

[3]  S Handel,et al.  Effect of rhythmic grouping on stream segregation. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  A. Bregman,et al.  Crossing of Auditory Streams , 1985 .

[5]  M. R. Jones,et al.  Evidence for rhythmic attention. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  Alexander I. Rudnicky,et al.  Auditory segregation: stream or streams? , 1975, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Albert S. Bregman,et al.  The Auditory Scene. (Book Reviews: Auditory Scene Analysis. The Perceptual Organization of Sound.) , 1990 .

[8]  N. Cowan Evolving conceptions of memory storage, selective attention, and their mutual constraints within the human information-processing system. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  D. Woods,et al.  Feature processing during high-rate auditory selective attention , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  Perceptual context and the selective attention effect on auditory event-related brain potentials. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

[11]  K. Alho,et al.  Stages of auditory feature conjunction: an event-related brain potential study. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Albert S. Bregman,et al.  Role of predictability of sequence in auditory stream segregation , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  D. Woods,et al.  Auditory selective attention in middle-aged and elderly subjects: an event-related brain potential study. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  A. Bregman,et al.  Primary auditory stream segregation and perception of order in rapid sequences of tones. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  M. R. Jones,et al.  Time, our lost dimension: toward a new theory of perception, attention, and memory. , 1976, Psychological review.