The Auditory Skills Necessary for Echolocation: A New Explanation

Abstract

<jats:p> The study presented here explored theories that account for echolocation and established an audiometric test battery for blind persons that is designed to predict success in echolocation. Statistical analyses revealed significant positive correlations between particular auditory measures and echolocation performance. No relationships were found between high-frequency hearing sensitivity and echolocation performance. </jats:p>

An assessment of auditory-guided locomotion in an obstacle circumvention task

“…Results from the current study and others (Supa et al 1944 ; Carlson-Smith and Weiner 1996 ) show that auditory-guided locomotion is possible in an indoor environment, where room reverberation can sometimes benefit echolocation. Schenkman and Nilsson ( 2010 ) showed that echolocation detection performance was better in a reverberant room than in an anechoic room, possibly due to an “information surplus principle”, as changes in reverberation pattern offer a potential cue.…”

“…In summary, the aim of the current study was to build on and extend previous work investigating auditory-guided locomotion in indoor environments (Supa et al 1944 ; Strelow and Brabyn 1982 ; Carlson-Smith and Weiner 1996 ) by assessing the obstacle circumvention performance of blindfolded sighted echo-naïve participants generating mouth click sounds. Visually guided locomotion was used as a baseline.…”

“…Several studies have investigated whether audition informs locomotion for blind (Supa et al 1944 ; Worchel et al 1950 ; Worchel and Mauney 1951 ; Ammons et al 1953 ) and blindfolded sighted participants (Supa et al 1944 ; Carlson-Smith and Weiner 1996 ; Rosenblum et al 2000 ) using an obstacle approach and detection task. Although collisions did sometimes occur, participants were able to use sound to approach a large obstacle such as a wall, report when they first perceived it, approach it as close as possible without touching it, and to stop in front of it to face it.…”

“…Although collisions did sometimes occur, participants were able to use sound to approach a large obstacle such as a wall, report when they first perceived it, approach it as close as possible without touching it, and to stop in front of it to face it. Various sounds could be used to perform the task, including shoe clicks on a hardwood floor (Supa et al 1944 ; Worchel and Dallenbach 1947 ) or linoleum (Carlson-Smith and Weiner 1996 ), sounds from shoes when walking along a concrete path (Worchel et al 1950 ; Worchel and Mauney 1951 ; Ammons et al 1953 ), or a sound chosen by the participant, such as mouth clicks or the words “hello” or “check” (Rosenblum et al 2000 ). Detection was also possible with sounds from feet wearing stockings on a carpet, although performance was poorer than that with shoes on a hardwood floor (Supa et al 1944 ).…”

Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of the echo clicks and social vocalizations of swiftlets (Aves: Apodidae)

“…The use and acuity of echolocation have been studied quite extensively in several species (e.g. Carlson‐Smith & Wiener, 1996; Griffin & Suthers, 1970; Fenton, 1975, 1980; Medway & Pye, 1977; Griffin & Thompson, 1982; Suthers & Hector, 1982; Coles, Konishi & Pettigrew, 1987; Fullard et al ., 1993). However, as yet less attention has been paid to interspecific comparison of the structure of echo clicks.…”