Psychophysical experiments conducted remotely over the internet permit data collection from large numbers of participants, but sacrifice control over sound presentation, and therefore are not widely employed in hearing research. To help standardize online sound presentation, we introduce a brief psychophysical test for determining if online experiment participants are wearing headphones. Listeners judge which of three pure tones is quietest, with one of the tones presented 180° out of phase across the stereo channels. This task is intended to be easy over headphones but difficult over loudspeakers due to phase-cancellation. We validated the test in the lab by testing listeners known to be wearing headphones or listening over loudspeakers. The screening test was effective and efficient, discriminating between the two modes of listening with a small number of trials. When run online, a bimodal distribution of scores was obtained, suggesting that some participants performed the task over loudspeakers despite instructions to use headphones. The ability to detect and screen out these participants mitigates concerns over sound quality for online experiments, a first step toward opening auditory perceptual research to the possibilities afforded by crowdsourcing.

A growing body of research--including results from behavioral psychology, human structural and functional imaging, single-cell recordings in nonhuman primates, and computational modeling--suggests that perceptual learning effects are best understood as a change in the ability of higher-level integration or association areas to read out sensory information in the service of particular decisions. Work in this vein has argued that, depending on the training experience, the "rules" for this read-out can either be applicable to new contexts (thus engendering learning generalization) or can apply only to the exact training context (thus resulting in learning specificity). Here we contrast learning tasks designed to promote either stimulus-specific or stimulus-general rules. Specifically, we compare learning transfer across visual orientation following training on three different tasks: an orientation categorization task (which permits an orientation-specific learning solution), an orientation estimation task (which requires an orientation-general learning solution), and an orientation categorization task in which the relevant category boundary shifts on every trial (which lies somewhere between the two tasks above). While the simple orientation-categorization training task resulted in orientation-specific learning, the estimation and moving categorization tasks resulted in significant orientation learning generalization. The general framework tested here--that task specificity or generality can be predicted via an examination of the optimal learning solution--may be useful in building future training paradigms with certain desired outcomes.

We introduce a novel experimental paradigm for studying multi-modal integration in causal inference. Our experiments feature a physically realistic Plinko machine in which a ball is dropped through one of three holes and comes to rest at the bottom after colliding with a number of obstacles. We develop a hypothetical simulation model which postulates that people figure out what happened by integrating visual and auditory evidence through mental simulation. We test the model in a series of three experiments. In Experiment 1, participants only receive visual information and either predict where the ball will land, or infer in what hole it was dropped based on where it landed. In Experiment 2, participants receive both visual and auditory information - they hear what sounds the dropped ball makes. We find that participants are capable of integrating both sources of information, and that the sounds help them figure out what happened. In Experiment 3, we show strong cue integration: even when vision and sound are individually completely non-diagnostic, participants succeed by combining both sources of evidence.

Effective curiosity-driven learning requires recognizing that the value of evidence for testing hypotheses depends on what other hypotheses are under consideration. Do we intuitively represent the discriminability of hypotheses? Here we show children alternative hypotheses for the contents of a box and then shake the box (or allow children to shake it themselves) so they can hear the sound of the contents. We find that children are able to compare the evidence they hear with imagined evidence they do not hear but might have heard under alternative hypotheses. Children (N = 160; mean: 5 years and 4 months) prefer easier discriminations (Experiments 1-3) and explore longer given harder ones (Experiments 4-7). Across 16 contrasts, children’s exploration time quantitatively tracks the discriminability of heard evidence from an unheard alternative. The results are consistent with the idea that children have an “intuitive psychophysics”: children represent their own perceptual abilities and explore longer when hypotheses are harder to distinguish.

No abstract