Discrimination of reproducible noise as a function of bandwidth and duration

The discriminability of reproducible noise bursts was studied as a function of bandwidth and duration. Listeners discriminated between trials consisting of two identical noise waveforms or two independent noise waveforms. New noise waveforms were generated each trial. In general, discrimination improved with increasing bandwidth. However, discrimination improved with increasing duration only up to about 25 msec, beyond which it decreased. Additional experiments examined discriminability with (1) forward or backward maskers, which intervened or did not intervene temporally between the comparison stimuli, (2) two noise waveforms fixed over 50 or 300 trials, and (3) high- or low-frequency noise bands. Results suggested that the decrease in discriminability beyond 25 msec was due primarily to sensory interactions of a central origin but with some effect of peripheral masking, memory interference, and attentional limitations. Information at the offset was discriminated best, and low-frequency information was better discriminated than high-frequency information. The results also indicated that envelope cues were used in certain conditions.

[1]  P. Fitzgibbons,et al.  Temporal gap detection in noise as a function of frequency, bandwidth, and level. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Reinier Plomp,et al.  Aspects of tone sensation , 1976 .

[3]  D. Raab,et al.  Noise‐intensity discrimination: Effects of bandwidth conditions and mode of masker presentation , 1976 .

[4]  D. M. Green,et al.  Multiple Observations of Signals in Noise , 1959 .

[5]  D M Green,et al.  The critical masking interval. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  B C Moore,et al.  Gap detection as a function of frequency, bandwidth, and level. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  T. Marill Detection theory and psychophysics , 1956 .

[8]  J C Craig,et al.  Vibrotactile masking: A comparison of energy and pattern maskers , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Forward masking of diotic and dichotic clicks by noise , 1981 .

[10]  D. Massaro Preperceptual images, processing time, and perceptual units in auditory perception. , 1972, Psychological review.

[11]  D. M. Green,et al.  Auditory Detection of a Noise Signal , 1960 .

[12]  A power law transformation resulting in a class of short-term integrators that produce time-intensity trades for noise bursts. , 1978 .

[13]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[14]  David M. Green,et al.  Detection of Multiple Component Signals in Noise , 1958 .

[15]  David M. Green,et al.  MINIMUM INTEGRATION TIME , 1973 .

[16]  E Galanter,et al.  A significance test for one parameter isosensitivity functions , 1967, Psychometrika.

[17]  D. M. Green,et al.  Discrimination of transient signals having identical energy spectra. , 1970, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  J. E. Rose,et al.  Phase-locked response to low-frequency tones in single auditory nerve fibers of the squirrel monkey. , 1967, Journal of neurophysiology.

[19]  Masker interaction in pure-tone forward masking. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  James P. Egan,et al.  Signal detection theory and ROC analysis , 1975 .

[21]  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.

[22]  H. Duifhuis Consequences of peripheral frequency selectivity for nonsimultaneous masking. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  N I Durlach,et al.  Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  N. Durlach,et al.  Intensity perception. IV. Resolution in roving-level discrimination. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  L. Braida,et al.  Intensity perception. VII. Further data on roving-level discrimination and the resolution and bias edge effects. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  M. Turvey On peripheral and central processes in vision: inferences from an information-processing analysis of masking with patterned stimuli. , 1973, Psychological review.

[27]  M J Penner Evidence for two temporal processes in forward masking. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  S. Buus Discrimination of envelope frequency. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.