Auditory Perception and Cognition

Abstract

A. Auditory filter shapes at low frequenciesWe recently established two important findings on frequency tuning in the human inner ear. First, tuning was sharper than previously thought, and sharpened considerably with increasing frequency from 1000 to 8000 Hz; second, human tuning was sharper by a factor of two than that found in other mammals that are often used as models of human hearing (Shera, Guinan & Oxenham, 2002; PNAS 99:3318-23). The technique used that in that study was suitable only for frequencies at and above 1000 Hz. Important speech information is carried at lower frequencies, particularly when the speech is mixed with interfering sources. We have therefore developed a behavioral technique that allows us to estimate human filter shapes at lower frequencies. We find that the divergence between our new measures and the earlier estimates of filter tuning are less at low than at high frequencies and we are now in the position to provide a complete estimate of low-level human cochlear filter tuning from 250 Hz to 8000 Hz.

Effects of temporal shapes of sound markers on the perception of interonset time intervals

“…This is the first case in which such marker duration effects have been investigated with very short onset-onset intervals, which should be one necessary step in relating the findings in the field of time perception to those for rhythm perception as in speech and music (e.g., Large, 2008;Patel, 2008). Although sound onsets have been considered to be the most important cues for perceiving time intervals (e.g., McAdams & Drake, 2002), sound durations also have had substantial effects.…”

“…This issue is directly related to rhythm perception. Because the perception of rhythm is basically determined by neighboring intervals demarcated by the onsets of successive sounds (e.g., Handel, 1993;Large, 2008;McAdams & Drake, 2002;Patel, 2008), we were particularly interested in the perception of interonset time intervals. Perception of time intervals delimited by successive sounds is vital to speech perception; comparison of syllable durations, for example, is important in English (Handel, 1989;Spencer, 1996), as well as in Japanese (Amano & Hirata, 2010;Greenberg & Arai, 2004).…”

“…Even in the latter case, however, it was often difficult to determine the functional relationship between marker durations and the subjective duration of each individual time interval. Although Woodrow (1928) was interested in subjective duration per se in a single-time-interval paradigm, he utilized only offset-onset intervals as "empty" time intervals; they were different from the onset-onset intervals that are essential to auditory communication (e.g., Handel, 1993;Large, 2008;McAdams & Drake, 2002;Patel, 2008). We have to be careful when defining "empty durations," because differences between the perception of an onset and the perception of an offset in terms of timing have been demonstrated repeatedly in various contexts (Efron, 1970;Fastl & Zwicker, 2007;Grondin, 1993Grondin, , 2003Grondin, Meilleur-Wells, Ouellette, & Macar, 1998;Kato, Tsuzaki, & Sagisaka, 2003).…”

Autistic Traits and Enhanced Perceptual Representation of Pitch and Time

“…In the discrimination of empty time intervals as used here, which are, defined by the onsets of consecutive events rather than the on-off duration of individual events this is not possible: the task can only be solved based on the timing. The timing of event onsets as tested here provides salient information in temporal pattern (rhythm) perception with or without a beat (Grube and Griffiths 2009;McAdams and Drake 2002;Monahan and Hirsh 1990;Povel and Essens 1985), and is relevant in the perception of speech (Rosen 1992;Scott 1982) and music (London 2004).…”

“…Stimulus timing is crucial in the auditory modality for speech and music (Chi et al 1999;Jusczyk 1999;Klatt 1976;Liberman et al 1956;Rosen 1992;Scott 1982). Most relevant is the inter-onset-timing between one event and the next: the perception of the timing of auditory events relies on determining the time between events rather than the duration of an event (Grube and Griffiths 2009;London 2004;McAdams and Drake 2002;Monahan and Hirsh 1990;Povel and Essens 1985). In order to test the enhanced low-level processing model in the auditory domain in relation to everyday relevance, we tested the perception of pitch and inter-onset-interval timing.…”