Auditory Segmentation and the Method of Dichotic Stimulation

Myers, Terry; Zhukova, M.G.; Chistovich, Ludmila A.; Mushnikov, V.N.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-248550-3.50020-9

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, performance dropped for a DF0 of 12 semitones, which was taken as evidence that the two competing utterances could not be segregated when their harmonics coincided. This interpretation is very intuitive given the known phenomenon of perceptual fusion for octave differences (Broadbent and Ladefoged, 1957;Myers et al, 1975) but it only holds provided that the target voice was equally intelligible irrespective of its F0 and this assumption might not be valid. The elevated F0 of the target voice could, itself, have resulted in reduced intelligibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Roles of the target and masker fundamental frequencies in voice segregation

Deroche

Culling

Chatterjee

et al. 2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intelligibility of a target voice improves when its fundamental frequency (F0) differs from that of a masking voice, but it remains unclear how this masking release (MR) depends on the two relative F0s. Three experiments measured speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for a target voice against different maskers. Experiment 1 evaluated the influence of target F0 itself. SRTs against white noise were elevated by at least 2 dB for a monotonized target voice compared with the unprocessed voice, but SRTs differed little for F0s between 50 and 150 Hz. In experiments 2 and 3, a MR occurred when there was a steady difference in F0 between the target voice and a stationary speech-shaped harmonic complex or a babble. However, this MR was considerably larger when the F0 of the masker was 11 semitones above the target F0 than when it was 11 semitones below. In contrast, for a fixed masker F0, the MR was similar whether the target F0 was above or below. The dependency of these MRs on the masker F0 suggests that a spectral mechanism such as glimpsing in between resolved masker partials may account for an important part of this phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Roles of the target and masker fundamental frequencies in voice segregation

Deroche

Culling

Chatterjee

et al. 2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Speech Perception

Studdert‐Kennedy

1980

Lang Speech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper reviews selected studies in speech perception, most of them published in the past five years. Topics include the contributions of prosody to segmental perception, the problems of segmentation and invariance, categorical perception of speech and non-speech, the role of feature detectors, the scaling of speech sounds to an auditory-articulatory space, acoustic phonetic dependencies within the syllable, the contributions of higher order (nonphonetic) factors to the comprehension of fluent speech, and cerebral specialization. The bias of the paper is toward viewing phonetic segments as abstract processes that link sound and articulation, and that become available to the listener through specialized sensorimotor mechanisms.

show abstract

Auditory Segmentation and the Method of Dichotic Stimulation

Cited by 2 publications

References 1 publication

Roles of the target and masker fundamental frequencies in voice segregation

Roles of the target and masker fundamental frequencies in voice segregation

Speech Perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About