2010
DOI: 10.3758/app.72.2.454
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

3-D localization of virtual sound sources: Effects of visual environment, pointing method, and training

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
183
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 114 publications
(198 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
14
183
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The results of our experiment are better than those obtained by Blum et al (2004), who recorded for their test group a mean precision error of 29 degrees and a rate of front-back confusions of 25% after the training session. Similarly, our results are comparable with those presented by Majdak et al (2010), who recorded a precision error of 23.3 degrees before training and of 19.8 degrees after the visual-auditory feedback based adaptation procedure. In what concerns the front-back confusion rate, our results are better than those obtained by Parseihian and Katz (2012), who recorded a reduction in the front-back confusion rate from 25-27% to 11% in the post-test session of the experiment.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…The results of our experiment are better than those obtained by Blum et al (2004), who recorded for their test group a mean precision error of 29 degrees and a rate of front-back confusions of 25% after the training session. Similarly, our results are comparable with those presented by Majdak et al (2010), who recorded a precision error of 23.3 degrees before training and of 19.8 degrees after the visual-auditory feedback based adaptation procedure. In what concerns the front-back confusion rate, our results are better than those obtained by Parseihian and Katz (2012), who recorded a reduction in the front-back confusion rate from 25-27% to 11% in the post-test session of the experiment.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…This monotonic relationship between LE and frequency does not hold, however, for lateral angles, that is, for sound sources not located on the median plane (e.g., Giguère and Abel, 1993). In general, most reports indicate that listeners tend to overestimate the actual lateral position of sound sources located at angles larger than 30° by 5°-15° in both natural (Oldfield and Parker, 1984a) and virtual environments Majdak et al, 2010). In contrast, Perrott et al (1987) reported that their listeners had a tendency to underestimate the lateral positions of the sound sources.…”
Section: Absolute Localizationmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…These dynamic cues are the most important for low frequency sounds below 2 kHz (Thurlow and Mergener, 1970). Most authors report much larger localization errors when the listener's head is fixed than when the listener is allowed to turn his head toward the source of sound (e.g., Link and Lehnhardt, 1966) and several authors consider head movements as the most essential mechanism in solving front-back uncertainty (originally proposed as such by Van Soest, 1929, and later corroborated by Börger et al, 1977;DiCarlo and Brown, 1960;Mackensen, 2003;Majdak et al, 2010;Nordlund, 1962ab;Wallach, 1939;and Wightman and Kistler, 1999). studied the localization performance of listeners who were allowed to move their heads while keeping their torso straight.…”
Section: Head Movementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In some experiments on sound source localization, laser pointer-based methods [33][34][35] are often used to locate the exact location of sound source perceived and pointed by listeners. Since we mainly focus on the difference of perceived virtual sound location between processed and unprocessed multichannel audio excerpts, the listener just needs to tell how about the differences, obvious or not.…”
Section: Subjective Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%