Perceived Rate of Monotic and Dichotically Alternating Clicks

Axelrod, Seymour; Guzy, Lawrence T.; Diamond, Irving T.

doi:10.1121/1.1910761

Cited by 34 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This latter result is a quantification of the observation, first reported by Axelrod, Guzy, and Diamond (1968), that the apparent repetition rate of interaural sequences is slower than that of monaural sequences. A further study undertaken by Axelrod and Powazek (1972) revealed that the difference in apparent rate between alternating and nonalternating sequences became smaller with decreasing angular separation between the alternating tones.…”

supporting

confidence: 73%

The effect of a contralateral drone on the perceptual onset asynchrony of interaural tone sequences

Akerboom

Hoopen

1983

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies reported that subjects have difficulty in processing a sequence of auditory signals if the sequence alternates between ears: Alternating speech and melodies are recognized poorly. If, however, the ears not receiving this information are "filled" with noise or with a lower constant-frequency tone (drone), recognition improves again. This improvement is due to the fact that the signal is subjectively alternating to a much lesser extent. The present study was an attempt to measure the subjective ambient bandwidth within which the interaural signal moves when a contralateral drone is supplied. It turned out that the signal, although alternating between ears, appeared to arise from the middle of the head. The results were discussed in terms of auditory illusions.It has been shown that subjects have more difficulty in processing a sequence of auditory signals if the sequence is alternated between the ears rather than being presented to just one ear. Cherry and Taylor (1954) demonstrated that a spoken message that was switched back and forth between the ears (duty cycle0.5) becomes least intelligibleat 3 alternations/sec, although all of the speech signal is physically present at either one ear or the other. They interpreted these results as being a consequence of a limitation in the rate at which listeners can switch their attention.Interestingly, Schubert and Parker (1956) found a strong increase in the intelligibility of alternating speech when the ear contralateral to the ear receiving the speech signal was stimulated with noise. A related effect was described by Deutsch (1979). She found a marked decrement in the recognition of melodies when the components of the melody were switched between the ears. This decrement, however, could be largely nullified by adding a drone (a lower constant-frequency tone of 345 Hz) to the ear opposite to the one receiving the melody. Deutsch mentioned that, in the latter condition, her subjects mislocalized the signals: "some perceived the melody on one side and the drone as localized on the other; others perceived the drone as in the center of the head and the melody as slowly shifting its position" (Deutsch, 1979, p. 403).

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 73%

The effect of a contralateral drone on the perceptual onset asynchrony of interaural tone sequences

Akerboom

Hoopen

1983

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, ear-alternating sound sequences have a slower subjective speed than their nonalternating counterparts have-a phenomenon first reported by Axelrod and co-workers Axelrod, Guzy, & Diamond, 1968;Guzy & Axelrod, 1972). This illusory phenomenon is probably related to what has been called "the sluggishness of the binaural system" (Moore, 1989, p. 222).…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

The detection of anisochrony in monaural and interaural sound sequences

Hoopen

Boelaarts

Gruisen

et al. 1994

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nakao and Axelrod (1976) and van Noorden (1975) showed that the threshold for discriminating an an isochronous duple rhythm (a series of clicks with a temporal offset on every other one) from an isochronous rhythm (no offset) is poorer when the clicks are presented alternately to the two ears than when they are presented to the same ears. Van Noorden reported that the difference between the thresholds in the alternating and nonalternating conditions varied with the tempo of the sequence. Nakao and Axelrod found invariance of this threshold difference with sequence speed. According to our quantification of temporal processing of interaural sequences, the latter result should be expected. We carried out five psychophysical experiments to establish interaural and monaural discrimination between isochronous and anisochronous rhythms. Across experiments, base time intervals of 60-720 msec were spanned. The main result was that we replicated the poorer discrimination for interaural sequences. This deterioration in discrimination was the same for all sequence speeds. It was also the case that the thresholds were almost constant up to a sound repetition rate of about 3 per second, but increased linearly with slower rates. This result supports evidence in the literature that temporal processing of sequences faster than about 3-4 sounds per second differs from temporal processing of slower sequences.

show abstract

“…At these repetition rates, the listener appears unable to shift attention rapidly enough back and forth between the ears to permit perception of all the presented clicks, so that the effective rate of dichotic clicks is substantially diminished. The apparent slowing of dichotic clicks has been observed in experiments using the psychophysical methods of limits and constant stimuli, in which Ss judged between successively presented monotic and dichotic trains, and in an experimen t in which Ss estimated the rates in clicks/second Axelrod, Guzy, & Diamond, 1968).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%