Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16396016

The relation between auditory temporal interval processing and sequential stream segregation examined with stimulus laterality differences.

Susan E Boehnke·Dennis P Phillips
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In this study, we examine the effects of laterality differences between noise bursts on two objective measures of temporal interval processing (gap detection and temporal asymmetry detection) and one subjective measure of temporal organization (stream segregation). Noise bursts were lateralized by presentation to different ears or dichotic presentation with oppositely signed interaural level (ILD) or time (ITD) differences. Objective thresholds were strongly affected by ear-of-entry differences, were moderately affected by ILD differences, but were unaffected by ITD differences. Subjectively, A and B streams segregated well on the basis of ear-of-entry or ILD differences but segregated poorly on the basis of ITD differences. These results suggest that perceptual segregation may be driven more effectively by differential activation of the two ears (peripheral channeling) than by differences in perceived laterality.

Explore related subjects

Auditory PerceptionDiscrimination, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMaleTime PerceptionJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Susan E Boehnke, Dennis P Phillips. 2005. The relation between auditory temporal interval processing and sequential stream segregation examined with stimulus laterality differences.. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193634

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

What we know about what we have never heard: evidence from perceptual illusions.

Are speakers equipped with preferences concerning grammatical structures that are absent in their language? We examine this question by investigating the sensitivity of English speakers to the sonority of onset clusters. Linguistic research suggests that certain onset clusters are universally preferred (e.g., bd>lb). We demonstrate that such preferences modulate the perception of unattested onsets by English speakers: Monosyllabic auditory nonwords with onsets that are universally dispreferred (e.g., lbif) are more likely to be classified as disyllabic and misperceived as identical to their disyllabic counterparts (e.g., lebif) compared to onsets that are relatively preferred across languages (e.g., bdif). Consequently, dispreferred onsets benefit from priming by their epenthetic counterpart (e.g., lebif-lbif) as much as they benefit from identity priming (e.g., lbif-lbif). A similar pattern of misperception (e.g., lbif-->lebif) was observed among speakers of Russian, where clusters of this type occur. But unlike English speakers, Russian speakers perceived these clusters accurately on most trials, suggesting that the perceptual illusions of English speakers are partly due to their linguistic experience, rather than phonetic confusion alone. Further evidence against a purely phonetic explanation for our results is offered by the capacity of English speakers to perceive such onsets accurately under conditions that encourage precise phonetic encoding. The perceptual illusions of English speakers are also irreducible to several statistical properties of the English lexicon. The systematic misperception of universally dispreferred onsets might reflect their ill-formedness in the grammars of all speakers, irrespective of linguistic experience. Such universal grammatical preferences implicate constraints on language learning.

Auditory Perception↗
PubMed2006

Masking by inaudible sounds and the linearity of temporal summation.

Many natural sounds, including speech and animal vocalizations, involve rapid sequences that vary in spectrum and amplitude. Each sound within a sequence has the potential to affect the audibility of subsequent sounds in a process known as forward masking. Little is known about the neural mechanisms underlying forward masking, particularly in more realistic situations in which multiple sounds follow each other in rapid succession. A parsimonious hypothesis is that the effects of consecutive sounds combine linearly, so that the total masking effect is a simple sum of the contributions from the individual maskers. The experiment reported here tests a counterintuitive prediction of this linear-summation hypothesis, namely that a sound that itself is inaudible should, under certain circumstances, affect the audibility of subsequent sounds. The results show that, when two forward maskers are combined, the second of the two maskers can continue to produce substantial masking, even when it is completely masked by the first masker. Thus, inaudible sounds can affect the perception of subsequent sounds. A model incorporating instantaneous compression (reflecting the nonlinear response of the basilar membrane in the cochlea), followed by linear summation of the effects of the maskers, provides a good account of the data. Despite the presence of multiple sources of nonlinearity in the auditory system, masking effects by sequential sounds combine in a manner that is well captured by a time-invariant linear system.

Auditory Perception↗
PubMed2006

The mismatch negativity in cognitive and clinical neuroscience: theoretical and methodological considerations.

Mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the event-related brain potentials has become popular in cognitive and clinical brain research during the recent years. It is an early response to a violation of an auditory rule such as an infrequent change in the physical feature of a repetitive sound. There is a lot of evidence on the association of the MMN parameters and behavioral discrimination ability, although this relationship is not always straight-forward. Since the MMN reflects sound discrimination accuracy, it can be used for probing how well different groups of individuals perceive sound differences, and how training or remediation affects this ability. In the present review, we first introduce some of the essential MMN findings in probing sound discrimination, memory, and their deficits. Thereafter, issues which need to be taken into account in MMN investigations as well as new improved recording paradigms are discussed.

Auditory Perception↗