Directional localization in high ambient noise with and without the use of hearing protectors

Mershon, Donald H.; Lin, Lee-Jean

doi:10.1080/00140138708966005

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are consistent with the conclusions reached by several previous investigators (Abel, 1996;Atherley & Else, 1971;Atherley & Noble, 1970;Mershon & Lin, 1987;Noble et al, 1990;Noble & Russell, 1972;Russell, 1976), indicating that HPDs disrupt localization even for participants with normal hearing. The increased high-frequency attenuation provided by the E-A-R earplug, although providing protection, appears to disrupt the auditory system's ability to detect or discriminate the high-frequency information required to distinguish front from back sound sources.…”

Section: Effects Of Helmet or Earplugs Worn Individuallysupporting

confidence: 95%

“…localization ability with HPDs is simply the overall attenuation provided by HPDs, or if the altered shape of the spectrum produced by HPDs also contributes to poorer performance. The former notion, called the attenuation hypothesis, received some support from studies indicating that as the attenuation of an HPD increased, so did the detrimental effect on localization performance (Mershon & Lin, 1987;Noble et al, 1990;Noble & Russell, 1972). However, given that these studies did not measure the frequency-specific attenuation characteristics of the various HPDs, it is not possible to know how disruption of spectral shape may have also contributed to the decreased localization performance.…”

Section: Effects Of Earplugs and Protective Headgear On Auditory Locamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Earplugs and Protective Headgear on Auditory Localization Ability in the Horizontal Plane

Vause

Grantham

1999

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine how well humans localize sound sources in the horizontal plane while wearing protective headgear with and without hearing protection. In a source identification task, a stimulus was presented from 1 of 20 loudspeakers arrayed in a semicircular arc, and participants stated which loudspeaker emitted the sound. Each participant was tested in 8 conditions involving various combinations of wearing a Kevlar army helmet and two types of earplugs. Testing was conducted at each of 2 orientations (frontal and lateral). In the frontal orientation, overall error was slightly greater in all protected conditions than in the bare-head control condition. In the lateral orientation, overall error score in the protected conditions was substantially and significantly greater than in the bare-head control conditions. Most errors in the lateral orientation were accounted for by front-back confusions, indicating that the protective devices disrupted high-frequency spectral cues that are the basis for discriminating front from back sound sources. The results have practical implications for the use of protective headgear and earplugs in industrial or military environments where localization of critical sounds is important.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Helmet or Earplugs Worn Individuallysupporting

confidence: 95%

Section: Effects Of Earplugs and Protective Headgear On Auditory Locamentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Earplugs and Protective Headgear on Auditory Localization Ability in the Horizontal Plane

Vause

Grantham

1999

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For lateral target locations (i.e., positions moving away from the midsaggital plane toward +90° azimuth), other researchers have reported smaller localization errors for target signals originating from front hemisphere locations (e.g., +45° azimuth) compared to rear locations (e.g., +135° azimuth) in quiet (Carlile et al, 1997;Makous and Middlebrooks, 1990;Oldfield and Parker, 1984;Wightman and Kistler, 1989b). Similar conclusions have been reached in this study as well as in other studies measuring relative localization  performance (Jacobsen, 1976;King and Laird, 1930;Scharf and Canevet, 1980) and absolute localization † performance in DN or NDN (Dobbins and Kindick, 1966;1967;Good et al, 1997;Lorenzi et al, 1999;Mershon and Lin, 1987). While the patterns of performance found in the present study are comparable to patterns of localization performance in quiet environments, measured LA and LE did not achieve the high performance levels reported for quiet environments across all test conditions.…”

Section: Discussion Of Localization Accuracy and Error As A Function supporting

confidence: 77%

Localization of a Speech Target in Nondirectional and Directional Noise as a Function of Sensation Level

Abouchacra¹,

Łȩtowski²

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, ARL-TR-6030 SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES* American University of Beirut Medical Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Beirut, Lebanon ABSTRACTBoth the detectability and localizability of a target signal must be considered when the signal is presented with multiple other sounds in an environment. When target and noise sources are separated spatially, target speech detection, recognition, and intelligibility improve substantially. Less information is known, however, about the effect of spatial separation on a listener's localization performance. In the present study, we examine the accuracy of localization judgments in various multiple sound source environments. Localization performance was examined as a function of sensation level (SL) in an attempt to account for changes in signal audibility resulting from changes in directional position of the sound source. A target speech signal (S) was presented at 0-, 6-, 12-, and 18-dB SL in reference to hearing threshold masked by 65-dB A-weighted nondirectional (NDN) or directional (DN) speech-spectrum noise. The listeners consisted of 40 young adults with normal hearing. At the beginning of the study, directional detection thresholds (DDTs) were established for all listeners in each target-noise condition (5 NDN conditions and 35 DN conditions). We calculated the appropriate SLs needed for the localization task from the DDTs of individual listeners. All listeners demonstrated decreases in localization error (°) and increases in localization precision (%) as SL increased. Changes in overall localization performance as a function of SL were similar in NDN and DN. When target-noise conditions were grouped according to the location of S, localization performance was (a) most accurate when S originated from 0° and +90° azimuth, (b) relatively accurate when S was positioned at +45° azimuth, and (c) poor when S originated from rear-horizontal plane positions (+135° and 180° azimuth). At lower SLs, localization performance was poorer than performance reported in other studies of localization in noise. This report covers localization biases, error types, and the relationship between target detection and localization. iii

show abstract

“…Earplugs may result in some ipsilateral judgment errors, but generally they cause fewer localization problems than do muffs. Exceptions exist, however, in that at least one high-attenuation earplug disrupts localization in magnitude similar to muffs (Mershon & Lin, 1987). In an effort to compensate for the lost pinnae-derived cues for sound localization that are typically destroyed with application of an earmuff, dichotic sound transmission HPDs, with a sound pickup microphone on each earmuff cup, can be utilized to maintain some of the binaural cues.…”

Section: Conventional Hpd Effects On Hearing Ability For Speech and Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Protection and Enhancement of Hearing in Noise

Casali¹,

Gerges²

2006

Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans are subjected to noise in many occupational, military, transportation, recreational, and other settings, sometimes with attendant ill effects. Some noises may pose the threat of inducing hearing loss; most noises compromise one's ability to hear signals and other desirable sounds, as well as to communicate via speech. In this chapter, we review the role of noise in human hearing impairment and its effects on signal audibility and speech intelligibility, task performance, and nonauditory responses. Particular emphasis is paid to the needs of the human factors/ergonomics practitioner who is confronted with the objective of protecting individuals' hearing in noise, designing signals so that they are audible and recognizable, and in general, optimizing the use of the auditory sense under poor acoustic conditions. In addition to providing guidance and consensus standards for auditory danger signal design, we provide a review of new technologies in augmented hearing protection. These technologies are aimed at protecting the user's hearing in noise from injury while affording improved audibility for certain applications.

show abstract

Directional localization in high ambient noise with and without the use of hearing protectors

Cited by 5 publications

References 12 publications

Effects of Earplugs and Protective Headgear on Auditory Localization Ability in the Horizontal Plane

Effects of Earplugs and Protective Headgear on Auditory Localization Ability in the Horizontal Plane

Localization of a Speech Target in Nondirectional and Directional Noise as a Function of Sensation Level

Protection and Enhancement of Hearing in Noise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About