Influences of modulation and spatial separation on detection of a masked broadband target.

Experiments explored the influence of amplitude modulation and spatial separation on detectability of a broadband noise target masked by an independent broadband noise. Thresholds were measured for all combinations of six spatial configurations of target and masker and five modulation conditions. Masker level was either fixed (Experiment 1) or roved between intervals within a trial to reduce the utility of overall intensity as a cue (Experiment 2). After accounting for acoustic changes, thresholds depended on whether a target and a masker were colocated or spatially separated, but not on the exact spatial configuration. Moreover, spatial unmasking exceeded that predicted by better-ear acoustics only when modulation cues for detection were weak. Roving increased the colocated but not the spatially separated thresholds, resulting in an increase in spatial release from masking. Differences in both how performance changed over time and the influence of spatial separation support the idea that the cues underlying performance depend on the modulation characteristics of the target and masker. Analysis suggests that detection is based on overall intensity when target and masker modulation and spatial cues are the same, on spatial attributes when sources are separated and modulation provides no target glimpses, and on modulation discrimination in the remaining conditions.

[1]  D M Green,et al.  Signal and masker uncertainty in intensity discrimination. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  K. Saberi,et al.  Free-field release from masking. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  S van de Par,et al.  Comparison of monaural (CMR) and binaural (BMLD) masking release. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  C Trahiotis,et al.  Detection of interaural delay in high-frequency sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones, two-tone complexes, and bands of noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  G H Wakefield,et al.  Discrimination of modulation depth of sinusoidal amplitude modulation (SAM) noise. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  M. Florentine,et al.  Stimulus-driven, time-varying weights for comodulation masking release. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Bottom-up and top-down influences on spatial unmasking , 2005 .

[8]  W A Yost,et al.  Binaural modulation detection interference. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Binaural comodulation masking release: effects of masker interaural correlation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[11]  Magdalena Wojtczak,et al.  Forward masking of amplitude modulation: basic characteristics. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Yoichi Sugita,et al.  Auditory search asymmetry between pure tone and temporal fluctuating sounds distributed on the frontal-horizontal plane , 2003 .

[13]  Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  A cat’s cocktail party: Psychophysical, neurophysiological, and computational studies of spatial release from masking , 2005 .

[14]  Torsten Dau,et al.  External and internal limitations in amplitude-modulation processing. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  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.

[16]  B. Wright,et al.  A perceptual learning investigation of the pitch elicited by amplitude-modulated noise. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Emily Buss,et al.  Individual differences in the masking level difference with a narrowband masker at 500 or 2000 Hz. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  M. Gribskov,et al.  Profile Analysis , 1970 .

[19]  So,et al.  Stimulus‐driven, time‐varying weights for comodulation masking release , 1995 .

[20]  T. Dau.  Modeling auditory processing of amplitude modulation , 1997 .

[21]  H S Colburn,et al.  Theory of binaural interaction based on auditory-nerve data. II. Detection of tones in noise. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  H. Ury,et al.  LARGE SAMPLE AND OTHER MULTIPLE COMPARISONS AMONG MEANS , 1971 .

[23]  Virginia Best,et al.  Sound localization with a preceding distractor. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Spatial unmasking of nearby pure-tone targets in a simulated anechoic environment. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  C. Mason,et al.  Roving-level tone-in-noise detection. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  L. Braida,et al.  Towards a model for discrimination of broadband signals. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Detection in noise by spectro-temporal pattern analysis. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  Comodulation masking release and the role of wideband inhibition in the cochlear nucleus , 2005 .

[29]  Richard L Freyman,et al.  Auditory target detection in reverberation. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Leslie R Bernstein,et al.  Enhancing sensitivity to interaural delays at high frequencies by using "transposed stimuli". , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Bertrand Delgutte,et al.  Neural correlates and mechanisms of spatial release from masking: single-unit and population responses in the inferior colliculus. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[32]  Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Localizing nearby sound sources in a classroom: binaural room impulse responses. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  S van de Par,et al.  A new approach to comparing binaural masking level differences at low and high frequencies. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  M. Gribskov,et al.  [9] Profile analysis , 1990 .

[35]  Emily Buss,et al.  The masking level difference for signals placed in masker envelope minima and maxima. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  E. Owens,et al.  An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1997 .

[38]  Michael D. Good,et al.  Effects of Frequency on Free-Field Masking , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[39]  C. Mason,et al.  Profile analysis and level variation , 1984, Hearing Research.

[40]  AG Armin Kohlrausch,et al.  Discrimination of different temporal envelope structures of diotic and dichotic target signals within diotic wide-band noise , 2005 .

[41]  Effects of amplitude modulation on the coding of interaural time differences of low-frequency sounds in the inferior colliculus. I. Response properties. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[42]  Discrimination of depth of sinusoidal amplitude modulation with and without roved carrier levels. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  Andrew J. Byrne,et al.  Monaural and interaural temporal modulation transfer functions measured with 5-kHz carriers. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  B. Kollmeier,et al.  Modeling auditory processing of amplitude modulation. I. Detection and masking with narrow-band carriers. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  B. Moore.  An introduction to the psychology of hearing, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[46]  N. Viemeister.  Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.