Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Interference: Path Lengths

Interference: Path Lengths

Consider two sources of sound, that may or may not be in phase, emitting waves at a single frequency, and consider the frequencies to be the same.
Two special sources may be considered when they are in phase. This can be easily achieved by feeding the two sources from the same source. An example would be synchronizing the two speakers by feeding them with the same source, such as the sound waves produced by a tuning fork. This setup ensures that the two sources have the same frequency and are...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Front-back sound level differences for human heads and the 1000-Hz interaural level anomaly.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026

Same author

Localization of sound in rooms VI: Duplex theory.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2025

Same author

Analysis of vocal communication in the genus Falco.

Scientific reports·2023

Same author

Localization of tones in a room by moving listeners.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2021

Same author

Matched transaural synthesis with probe microphones for psychoacoustical experiments.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2019

Same author

Noise edge pitch and models of pitch perception.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2019

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 23, 2026

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Testing, correcting, and extending the Woodworth model for interaural time difference.

Neil L Aaronson¹, William M Hartmann²

¹Natural Science and Mathematics, Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, 101 Vera King Farris Drive, Galloway, New Jersey 08205.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

|September 20, 2014

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

The Woodworth model for interaural time difference (ITD) has limitations at lower frequencies. This study corrects a key error in the model, improving its accuracy for binaural hearing research.

More Related Videos

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Published on: April 22, 2015

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 23, 2026

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Published on: April 22, 2015

Area of Science:

Acoustics
Bioacoustics
Auditory Neuroscience

Background:

The Woodworth model is a standard for interaural time difference (ITD) calculations in binaural hearing research.
It's a frequency-independent, rigid spherical head model, expected to match high-frequency diffraction limits.

Purpose of the Study:

To quantify the discrepancy between the Woodworth model and an exact diffraction model at non-high frequencies.
To extend the Woodworth model for arbitrary ear angles and finite source distances.
To identify and correct an error in the Woodworth model's characteristic function.

Main Methods:

Comparing Woodworth model predictions with an exact diffraction model across a frequency range.
Extending the Woodworth model to include variable ear angles and point-source distances.
Analyzing the geometric assumptions leading to the Woodworth model's cusp artifact.

Main Results:

Significant discrepancies were found between the Woodworth model and the exact model at lower frequencies.
The extended Woodworth model yields different formulas across six defined regions.
The characteristic cusp in Woodworth's function arises from neglecting the longer head-diffraction path.

Conclusions:

The Woodworth model requires frequency-dependent corrections for accurate binaural hearing predictions at lower frequencies.
An extended, corrected Woodworth model offers improved accuracy for diverse acoustic scenarios.
Addressing the path-length error enhances the model's applicability in physiological and psychoacoustical studies.