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

Binaural modulation detection interference

S Sheft1, W A Yost

  • 1Parmly Hearing Institute, Loyola University of Chicago, Illinois 60626, USA.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
|September 25, 1997
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

Discrimination of rippled-spectrum noise from flat-spectrum noise by chinchillas: evidence for a spectral dominance region.

Hearing research·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

Disparities in sound presentation (interaural parameters) can reduce masking effects. Spatial separation and differing interaural configurations lessen interference in amplitude modulation (AM) detection.

Area of Science:

  • Auditory perception
  • Psychoacoustics
  • Signal processing in hearing

Background:

  • Detecting amplitude modulation (AM) is crucial for speech and sound perception.
  • Masking tones can interfere with AM detection, impacting auditory processing.
  • Interaural parameters (time, intensity, location) influence auditory object formation and signal segregation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if interaural parameter disparities between a probe tone and a masker tone reduce masking effects on AM detection.
  • To explore the role of interaural time differences (ITDs), interaural intensity differences (IIDs), and spatial separation in mitigating masking.

Main Methods:

  • Two experiments were conducted using tonal probes and modulated masking tones.
  • Experiment 1 manipulated interaural time and intensity differences with headphone presentation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Experiment 2 utilized sound-field presentation to introduce spatial separation between probe and masker sources.

    • Main Results:

    • Interaural time differences did not significantly reduce masking at low frequencies.
    • Interaural configuration differences reduced masking at higher frequencies, though monotic level differences may have played a role.
    • Spatial separation in sound-field conditions resulted in a small but significant reduction in masking interference.

    Conclusions:

    • Disparities in interaural parameters, particularly spatial separation and differing interaural configurations, can reduce the masking of amplitude modulation detection.
    • Auditory system utilizes interaural cues to segregate signals and improve AM detection in the presence of masker interference.
    • Findings have implications for understanding auditory scene analysis and designing hearing aid signal processing strategies.