Masking of short tones in noise: Evidence for envelope-based, rather than energy-based detection

Abstract

The “temporal effect” in simultaneous masking may be characterized by better probe detection thresholds for a short, tonal probe presented at the temporal center of a masker compared to at the onset of a masker. Energy-based models of masking have been used to interpret the temporal effect as evidence that the gain of the auditory system decreases during acoustic stimulation. This study shows that masking from temporal-envelope fluctuations of a precursor or from a temporal gap between stimuli violates the assumptions of energy-based models and complicates the interpretation of temporal effects in terms of a reduction in gain. Detection thresholds were measured for a 6-ms, 4000-Hz probe preceded by a narrowband precursor and presented 2-, 197-, or 392-ms after the onset of a narrowband masker. The delay between the precursor offset and masker onset ranged from −2 to 250 ms. Probe thresholds were elevated in the presence of precursors with fluctuating compared to flattened temporal envelopes and when a temporal gap was inserted between the precursor and masker. The results suggest that the interpretation and design of temporal-effect studies should consider the masking effects of temporal-envelope fluctuations. These findings are consistent with speech-perception experiments that show masking from temporal-envelope fluctuations.

Interactions among talker sex, masker number, and masker intelligibility in speech-on-speech recognition

“…Energetic masking describes the loss of target information due to the spectro-temporal overlap with the masker. Envelope masking describes the deleterious effects of envelope interference even when the spectral overlap between target and masker is reduced (e.g., Fogerty et al , 2016 ; Stone and Canavan, 2016 ; Jennings and Chen, 2020 ). Informational masking in the context of this study is restricted to lexical interference (i.e., both the target and masker speech are intelligible) and talker characteristics (e.g., talker sex, the number of maskers).…”

Tinnitus impairs segregation of competing speech in normal-hearing listeners

“…Steady noise largely produces energetic masking at the periphery (i.e., spectral overlap between the target and masker). Modulated noise and multi-talker babble may produce energetic as well as envelope masking in cochlear regions remote from the target, and may not depend on the degree of spectral overlap between the target and the masker 28 . Competing speech may produce energetic, envelope, and informational masking (due to lexical interference, talker characteristics, etc.).…”

Susceptibility to Steady Noise Largely Explains Susceptibility to Dynamic Maskers in Cochlear Implant Users, but not in Normal-Hearing Listeners

“…Informational masking is not caused by physical interactions between the target and masker and/or overlap at the auditory periphery ( Kidd & Colburn, 2017 ). Envelope masking reflects interference between target and masker temporal envelopes, even when spectral overlap (energetic masking) is reduced (e.g., Bronkhorst, 2015 ; Conroy & Kidd, 2021 ; Conroy et al, 2023 ; Fogerty et al, 2016 ; Jennings & Chen, 2020 ; Stone & Canavan, 2016 ). Conroy and Kidd (2021) found that uncertainty regarding masker modulation frequency could have adversely affected the detection of target modulations.…”