Localization of speech and non-speech sounds

Shigeno, Sumi; Oyama, Tadasu

doi:10.4992/psycholres1954.25.112

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Shigeno and Oyama (1983) compared localization accuracy of white noise pulses, speech, and pure tone signals in the horizontal plane and reported the largest CE for pure tones and the smallest for white noise pulses. For sound sources located close to the midline, the size of the error has also a tendency to increase with frequency.…”

Section: Absolute Localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Spatial Perception: Auditory Localization

Łȩtowski¹,

Letowski²

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, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

show abstract

Section: Absolute Localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Spatial Perception: Auditory Localization

Łȩtowski¹,

Letowski²

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The white noise was disregarded despite evidence suggesting that it is an easier signal to localise compared with other auditory sources, for example, a pure tone or noises with smaller bandwidth (Butler, 1986; Shigeno & Oyama, 1983; Tonning, 1975). Furthermore, in Experiment 1, the noise localization test revealed that participants were able to localise the auditory source, and the localization error was significantly smaller than that in the uphill identification test; this is an indication that a noisemaker has the potential of being a more accurate source of information for reorientation than the slope of the floor.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To someone who is already directing attention to it, a 40-dB white noise stands out in a quiet room when blindfolded. Previous studies have shown that white noise is easier to localise compared with other types of simple signals with smaller bandwidth, including a pure tone (Butler, 1986; Shigeno & Oyama, 1983; Tonning, 1975). This is why white noise was chosen for this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial reorientation with non-visual cues: Failure to spontaneously use auditory information

Nardi

Anzures

Clark

et al. 2018

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the environmental stimuli that can guide navigation in space, most attention has been dedicated to visual information. The process of determining where you are and which direction you are facing (called reorientation) has been extensively examined by providing the navigator with two sources of information-typically the shape of the environment and its features-with an interest in the extent to which they are used. Similar questions with non-visual cues are lacking. Here, blindfolded sighted participants had to learn the location of a target in a real-world, circular search space. In Experiment 1, two ecologically relevant non-visual cues were provided: the slope of the floor and an array of two identical auditory landmarks. Slope successfully guided behaviour, suggesting that proprioceptive/kinesthetic access is sufficient to navigate on a slanted environment. However, despite the fact that participants could localise the auditory sources, this information was not encoded. In Experiment 2, the auditory cue was made more useful for the task because it had greater predictive value and there were no competing spatial cues. Nonetheless, again, the auditory landmark was not encoded. Finally, in Experiment 3, after being prompted, participants were able to reorient by using the auditory landmark. Overall, participants failed to spontaneously rely on the auditory cue, regardless of how informative it was.

show abstract

“…Low frequencies are localized more accurately than high frequencies [3,19] but high frequencies increase the localization accuracy of sounds presented from the back of the listener [20,21]. In general, broad-band sounds are easier to localize than narrow-band sounds are (assuming equal energy in both), and pure tones are the most difficult to localize [3,7,[22][23][24][25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In such settings, the sound stimulus to be localized will most likely be either a single word (short-duration stimulus) or a sentence (long-duration stimulus). Yet, the localization of words has rarely been studied [23][24][25], and has mainly been explored in the context of hearing aids and cochlear implants [11,12]. In contrast, pink noise e.g., [8,11,26], pure tones, and other narrow-or broad-band noise stimuli [3,4,6,8,10,15,17,25,[27][28][29][30] have been repeatedly tested in localization studies, and studies relating to military and sporting activities (such as hunting) specifically focused on the localization of gunshots [7,[31][32][33][34].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Situational Awareness: The Effect of Stimulus Type and Hearing Protection on Sound Localization

Fostick¹,

Fink²

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the current study was to test sound localization of a spoken word, rarely studied in the context of localization, compared to pink noise and a gunshot, while taking into account the source position and the effect of different hearing protection devices (HPDs) used by the listener. Ninety participants were divided into three groups using different HPDs. Participants were tested twice, under with- and no-HPD conditions, and were requested to localize the different stimuli that were delivered from one of eight speakers evenly distributed around them (starting from 22.5°). Localization of the word stimulus was more difficult than that of the other stimuli. HPD usage resulted in a larger mean root-mean-square error (RMSE) and increased mirror image reversal errors for all stimuli. In addition, HPD usage increased the mean RMSE and mirror image reversal errors for stimuli delivered from the front and back, more than for stimuli delivered from the left and right. HPDs affect localization, both due to attenuation and to limitation of pinnae cues when using earmuffs. Difficulty localizing the spoken word should be considered when assessing auditory functionality and should be further investigated to include HPDs with different attenuation spectra and levels, and to further types of speech stimuli.

show abstract

Localization of speech and non-speech sounds

Cited by 7 publications

References 3 publications

Auditory Spatial Perception: Auditory Localization

Auditory Spatial Perception: Auditory Localization

Spatial reorientation with non-visual cues: Failure to spontaneously use auditory information

Situational Awareness: The Effect of Stimulus Type and Hearing Protection on Sound Localization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About