The spatial unmasking of speech: evidence for better-ear listening.

Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured for target speech presented concurrently with interfering speech (spoken by a different speaker). In experiment 1, the target and interferer were divided spectrally into high- and low-frequency bands and presented over headphones in three conditions: monaural, dichotic (target and interferer to different ears), and swapped (the low-frequency target band and the high-frequency interferer band were presented to one ear, while the high-frequency target band and the low-frequency interferer band were presented to the other ear). SRTs were highest in the monaural condition and lowest in the dichotic condition; SRTs in the swapped condition were intermediate. In experiment 2, two new conditions were devised such that one target band was presented in isolation to one ear while the other band was presented at the other ear with the interferer. The pattern of SRTs observed in experiment 2 suggests that performance in the swapped condition reflects the intelligibility of the target frequency bands at just one ear; the auditory system appears unable to exploit advantageous target-to-interferer ratios at different ears when segregating target speech from a competing speech interferer.

[1]  Donald E. Broadbent,et al.  Miscellanea: A Note on Binaural Fusion , 1955 .

[2]  IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements , 1969, IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics.

[3]  John F Culling,et al.  Speech perception from monaural and binaural information. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  R L Freyman,et al.  Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[7]  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.

[8]  Richard L Freyman,et al.  Effect of number of masking talkers and auditory priming on informational masking in speech recognition. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  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.

[10]  J. Bird.  Effects of a difference in fundamental frequency in separating two sentences. , 1997 .

[11]  C. Darwin,et al.  Perceptual separation of simultaneous vowels: within and across-formant grouping by F0. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The role of head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Our Perception of the Direction of a Source of Sound , 1876, Nature.

[14]  N I Durlach,et al.  Further results on binaural unmasking and the EC model. , 1966, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  L. Rayleigh,et al.  XII. On our perception of sound direction , 1907 .

[16]  J. Cutting.  Auditory and linguistic processes in speech perception: inferences from six fusions in dichotic listening. , 1976, Psychological review.

[17]  D S Brungart,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  J. Culling,et al.  Perceptual separation of concurrent speech sounds: absence of across-frequency grouping by common interaural delay. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  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.

[20]  Douglas S Brungart,et al.  Precedence-based speech segregation in a virtual auditory environment. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[22]  Ruth Y. Litovsky,et al.  Erratum: The role head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 1057 (2004)] , 2005 .

[23]  W. Hartmann,et al.  The role of reverberation in release from masking due to spatial separation of sources for speech identification , 2005 .

[24]  N. I. Durlach,et al.  Binaural signal detection - Equalization and cancellation theory. , 1972 .

[25]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: effect of location and type of interferer. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[27]  Michael A Akeroyd.  The across frequency independence of equalization of interaural time delay in the equalization-cancellation model of binaural unmasking. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  M. Ericson,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  B. Franklin.  Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance. , 1981 .

[30]  F. Wightman,et al.  The dominant role of low-frequency interaural time differences in sound localization. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  H. Fletcher,et al.  The Perception of Speech and Its Relation to Telephony , 1950 .

[32]  H. Gaskell.  The precedence effect , 1983, Hearing Research.

[33]  H. Steven Colburn.  Erratum: ''Theory of binaural interaction based on auditory-nerve data. II. Detection of tones in noise'' [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61, 525-533 (1977)] , 1977 .

[34]  Peter Ladefoged,et al.  On the Fusion of Sounds Reaching Different Sense Organs , 1957 .

[35]  John F Culling,et al.  The spatial unmasking of speech: evidence for within-channel processing of interaural time delay. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  L A JEFFRESS,et al.  A place theory of sound localization. , 1948, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[37]  J. Culling,et al.  The role of head-related time and level cues in the unmasking of speech in noise and competing speech , 2005 .

[38]  B. Moore,et al.  Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.