Loudness and reaction time: I

Abstract

It is widely assumed, based on Chocholle's (1940) research, that stimuli that appear equal in loudness will generate the same reaction times. In Experiment 1, we first obtained equal-loudness functions for five stimulus frequencies at four different intensity levels. It was found that equal loudness produced equal RT a~80 phons and 60 phons, but not at 40 phons and 20 phons. It is likely that Chocholle obtained equivalence between loudness and RT at all intensity levels because of relay-click transients in his RT signals. One main conclusion drawn from Experiment 1 is that signal detection (in reaction time) and stimulus discrimination (in loudness estimation) require different perceptual processes. In the second phase of this investigation, the RT-intensity functions from six different experiments were used to generate scales of auditory intensity. Our analyses indicate that when the nonsensory or "residual" component is removed from auditory RT measures, the remaining sensory-detection component is inversely related to sound pressure according to a power function whose exponent is about -.3. The absolute value of this exponent is the same as the .3 exponent for loudness when interval-scaling procedures are used, and is one-half the size of the .6 exponent which is commonly assumed for loudness scaling.The historic traditions that underlie the present research are formidable. Psychophysicists have consistently found a direct relation between auditory stimulus intensity and loudness. Specifically, Stevens and his colleagues have established that perceived loudness grows as a power function of stimulus intensity (Marks, 1974(Marks, , 1979. Equally impressive is the evidence in support of an inverse relation between stimulus intensity and simple auditory reaction time (RT). Classic experiments by Cattell (1886), Chocholle (1940), Pieron (1920), and Wundt (1874) have convincingly shown that RT decreases monotonically with corresponding increases in auditory stimulus intensity.Based on the fact that stimulus frequency, along with stimulus intensity, are the primary determinants of both loudness and RT, the present paper comprises two major sections in which these two stimulus attributes are evaluated. First, we evaluated the relation between equal loudness (across frequencies) and RT, using Chocholle's (1940) attempted to synthesize the data from several RT experiments in order to construct a uniform scale of sensory intensity that is based on RT measures. PHASE 1: EQUAL LOUDNESS AND REACTION TIMEIt is remarkable how many investigators have cited Chocholle's research, conducted over 40 years ago at the Sorbonne Laboratory, as the definitive study of the relation between auditory RT and signal intensity and frequency. His experiments were extensive but simple in design. Three experienced subjects generated RT-intensity functions over a wide range of intensity levels for frequencies of 20, 50, 250, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 4,000, 6,000, and 10,000 Hz. From these initial results, he drew "equal-RT" contours; that is, stimul...

Consequences of base time for redundant signals experiments

“…Meijers and Eijkman (1974) pointed out that, based on the same single-cell recording data, "the ratio between the variance of premotor-time and the variance of the motor-time varied from 5-10". These estimates of base time are in accord with the data of Kohfeld et al (1981) who report a mean of 136msec and a standard deviation of 9.1msec for the base time.…”

“…It is also apparent that asymmetric kernels can produce different deformations of the input functions, but these effects will depend on the shapes of both the kernel and the function that it is deforming. The distributions for f B (t) that we implement here are in accordance with estimates obtained experimentally by (Kohfeld et al, 1981) and also informally in our laboratory. However, Luce (1986) points out that asymmetric, long-tailed estimates of f B (t) have been reported (Snodgrass, 1969).…”

“…In our discussion in Section 5 we marshal some evidence (Evarts, 1966;Meijers and Eijkman, 1974;Kohfeld et al, 1981;Ratcliff et al, 2001) indicating that the variance of the base time is typically much smaller than the variance of the channel process variables A and V. In terms of our model parameters this means that we are most interested in the parameter regime in which β is greater than α(= ν). The deviations shown in Figure 11 for the regime β/α > 1 are not large; and when β/α > 2 (i.e when the standard deviation of the base time is less than twice the standard deviation of the process time) then the deviations are negligible.…”

Comparison of Absolute Thresholds Derived from an Adaptive Forced-Choice Procedure and from Reaction Probabilities and Reaction Times in a Simple Reaction Time Paradigm

“…A number of subsequent investigations obtained results that supported Chocholle's conclusion of a close inverse relationship between loudness and RT (e.g., McGill 1961;Pfingst et al 1975a;Marshall and Brandt 1980;Humes and Ahlstrom 1984;Wagner et al 2004;Florentine et al 2005; see also Scharf 1978). To our knowledge, only Kohfeld and colleagues (Santee and Kohfeld 1977;Kohfeld et al 1981) have suggested that the relationship between loudness and RT may not be as close and argued that the detection of a signal and the estimation of its loudness require different perceptual operations. However, the validity of their results was questioned (Buus et al 1982;Luce 1986, p. 70), because their equal-loudness contours differed substantially from those in most other studies.…”

Loudness Perception in the Domestic Cat: Reaction Time Estimates of Equal Loudness Contours and Recruitment Effects

“…The assumption that equally loud stimuli generate equal RTs is not without controversy, however. While Chocholle observed equivalence, Kohfeld et al (1981) did not. In the latter study, the inconsistency between loudness and RT was limited to lower loudness levels (20 phons) and may have been exacerbated by relatively sparse sampling of loudness matches and RT data.…”