Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Prior stimulation and the masking-level difference.

W A Yost

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
    |September 1, 1985
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

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

    Sort by
    Same author

    The perceptual tone/noise ratio of merged iterated rippled noises.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2000
    Same author

    Loudness recalibration as a function of level.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2000
    Same author

    The precedence effect.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·1999
    Same author

    The role of the envelope in processing iterated rippled noise.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·1999
    Same author

    Binaural modulation detection interference.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·1997
    Same author

    Modulation detection interference with two-component masker modulators.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·1997
    Same journal

    High-resolution depth estimation for multiple wideband sources in deep sea via sparse Bayesian learninga).

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    Same journal

    Depression markers in speech: An approach based on tract variables dynamics.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    Same journal

    The oyster toadfish (Opsanus tau) alters active and diurnal calling amid vessel noise in New York City.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    Same journal

    Experimental noise characterisation of phase-locked tandem-rotor in edgewise flight.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    Same journal

    The tune-text-temporal synergy: Prosodic effects of final segmental weakening in Neapolitan.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    Same journal

    Monitoring vessel movement above critical offshore infrastructure using distributed acoustic sensing.

    The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
    See all related articles

    Dichotic signal detection is impaired by preceding noise, especially when both signal and masker are pulsed. Adjusting prior noise parameters significantly impacts dichotic, but not diotic, signal detection.

    Area of Science:

    • Auditory perception
    • Psychoacoustics
    • Signal processing

    Background:

    • Masking-Level Difference (MLD) is crucial for understanding auditory signal detection.
    • Diotic (NoSo) and dichotic (NoS pi) listening conditions yield different detection thresholds.
    • The influence of preceding auditory noise (forward fringe) on MLD is not fully understood.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To investigate how preceding noise parameters affect signal detection in diotic and dichotic conditions.
    • To determine the sensitivity of dichotic detection to variations in forward fringe properties.
    • To compare the effects of forward fringe on diotic versus dichotic detection.

    Main Methods:

    • Measured signal detection in diotic and dichotic listening.
    • Varied parameters of a preceding noise (forward fringe) including level, spectrum, duration, and temporal proximity.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Manipulated signal and masker characteristics (pulsed vs. continuous).

    • Main Results:

    • Dichotic signal detection worsened when both signal and masker were pulsed.
    • Dichotic detection thresholds improved with increased duration of pulsed signal/masker.
    • Differences between fringe and masker parameters significantly degraded dichotic detection, with minimal impact (<2.2 dB) on diotic detection.

    Conclusions:

    • Forward fringe properties critically influence dichotic signal detection.
    • Dichotic listening is more vulnerable to masker/fringe parameter mismatches than diotic listening.
    • Existing MLD models may require modifications to account for forward fringe effects.