Release from masking due to spatial separation of sources in the identification of nonspeech auditory patterns.

A nonspeech pattern identification task was used to study the role of spatial separation of sources on auditory masking in multisource listening environments. The six frequency patterns forming the signal set were comprised of sequences of eight 60-ms tone bursts. Bursts of masking sounds were played synchronously with the signals. The main variables in the study were (1) the difference in spatial separation in the horizontal plane between signals and maskers and (2) the nature of the masking produced by the maskers. Spatial separation of signal and masker ranged from 0-180 degrees. The maskers were of two types: (1) a sequence of eight 60-ms bursts of Gaussian noise intended to produce predominantly peripherally based "energetic masking" and (2) a sequence of eight 60-ms bursts of eight-tone complexes intended to produce primarily centrally based "informational masking." The results indicated that identification performance improved with increasing separation of signal and masker. The amount of improvement depended upon the type of masker and the center frequency of the signal patterns. Much larger improvements were found for spatial separation of the signal and informational masker than for the signal and energetic masker. This was particularly apparent when the acoustical advantage of the signal-to-noise ratio in the more favorable of the two ears (the ear nearest the signal) was taken into account. The results were interpreted as evidence for an important role of binaural hearing in reducing sound source or message uncertainty and may contribute toward solving the "cocktail party problem."

[1]  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.

[2]  R A Lutfi,et al.  How much masking is informational masking? , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  W. Yost Auditory image perception and analysis: The basis for hearing , 1991, Hearing Research.

[4]  D M Green,et al.  Auditory profile analysis of irregular sound spectra. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  R. Plomp,et al.  Binaural speech intelligibility in noise for hearing-impaired listeners. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Ira J. Hirsh,et al.  The Relation between Localization and Intelligibility , 1950 .

[7]  C S Watson,et al.  Factors in the discrimination of tonal patterns. I. Component frequency, temporal position, and silent intervals. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[9]  C S Watson,et al.  Factors in the discrimination of tonal patterns. II. Selective attention and learning under various levels of stimulus uncertainty. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  H S Colburn,et al.  Reducing informational masking by sound segregation. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  G. Henning,et al.  Effect of interaural phase on frequency and amplitude discrimination. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  W Jesteadt,et al.  Informational masking for multicomponent maskers with spectral gaps. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Marjorie R. Leek,et al.  Informational masking and auditory attention , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  L. Rabiner,et al.  Binaural release from masking for speech and gain in intelligibility. , 1967, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[17]  Irwin Pollack,et al.  Stereophonic Listening and Speech Intelligibility against Voice Babble , 1958 .

[18]  D L Neff Signal properties that reduce masking by simultaneous, random-frequency maskers. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Frequency discrimination and the MLD. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  M R Leek,et al.  Learning to detect auditory pattern components. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  S. Sheft,et al.  A simulated “cocktail party” with up to three sound sources , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Effect of the orientation of the speaker's head and azimuth of a noise source on the speech reception threshold for sentences , 1980 .

[23]  D. Perrott Concurrent minimum audible angle: a re-examination of the concept of auditory spatial acuity. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  D. P. Goldstein,et al.  Suprathreshold Binaural Unmasking , 1972 .

[25]  P. Dallos,et al.  Unmasking for pure tones and spondees: interaural phase and time disparities. , 1968, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[26]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  D. W. Robinson,et al.  A re-determination of the equal-loudness relations for pure tones , 1956 .

[28]  D. M. Green,et al.  Masking produced by spectral uncertainty with multicomponent maskers , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Discriminating coherence in spectro-temporal patterns. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  C. Mason,et al.  Binaural advantage for sound pattern identification. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  E. C. Cherry Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears , 1953 .