Contralateral proximal interference

A contralateral ``cue'' tone presented in continuous broadband noise both lowers the threshold of a signal tone by guiding attention to it and raises its threshold by interference. Here, signal tones were fixed in duration (40 ms, 52 ms with ramps), frequency (1500 Hz), timing, and level,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Reeves, Adam, Seluakumaran, Kumar, Scharf, Bertram
Format: Article
Published: Acoustical Soc Amer Amer Inst Physics 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.um.edu.my/26985/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.um.eprints.26985
record_format eprints
spelling my.um.eprints.269852022-04-05T08:05:15Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/26985/ Contralateral proximal interference Reeves, Adam Seluakumaran, Kumar Scharf, Bertram HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare RB Pathology A contralateral ``cue'' tone presented in continuous broadband noise both lowers the threshold of a signal tone by guiding attention to it and raises its threshold by interference. Here, signal tones were fixed in duration (40 ms, 52 ms with ramps), frequency (1500 Hz), timing, and level, so attention did not need guidance. Interference by contralateral cues was studied in relation to cue-signal proximity, cue-signal temporal overlap, and cue-signal order (cue after: backward interference, BI; or cue first: forward interference, FI). Cues, also ramped, were 12 dB above the signal level. Long cues (300 or 600 ms) raised thresholds by 5.3 dB when the signal and cue overlapped and by 5.1 dB in FI and 3.2 dB in BI when cues and signals were separated by 40 ms. Short cues (40 ms) raised thresholds by 4.5 dB in FI and 4.0 dB in BI for separations of 7 to 40 ms, but by similar to 13 dB when simultaneous and in phase. FI and BI are comparable in magnitude and hardly increase when the signal is close in time to abrupt cue transients. These results do not support the notion that masking of the signal is due to the contralateral cue onset/offset transient response. Instead, sluggish attention or temporal integration may explain contralateral proximal interference. Acoustical Soc Amer Amer Inst Physics 2021-05 Article PeerReviewed Reeves, Adam and Seluakumaran, Kumar and Scharf, Bertram (2021) Contralateral proximal interference. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 149 (5). pp. 3352-3365. ISSN 0001-4966, DOI https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0004786 <https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0004786>. 10.1121/10.0004786
institution Universiti Malaya
building UM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaya
content_source UM Research Repository
url_provider http://eprints.um.edu.my/
topic HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare
RB Pathology
spellingShingle HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare
RB Pathology
Reeves, Adam
Seluakumaran, Kumar
Scharf, Bertram
Contralateral proximal interference
description A contralateral ``cue'' tone presented in continuous broadband noise both lowers the threshold of a signal tone by guiding attention to it and raises its threshold by interference. Here, signal tones were fixed in duration (40 ms, 52 ms with ramps), frequency (1500 Hz), timing, and level, so attention did not need guidance. Interference by contralateral cues was studied in relation to cue-signal proximity, cue-signal temporal overlap, and cue-signal order (cue after: backward interference, BI; or cue first: forward interference, FI). Cues, also ramped, were 12 dB above the signal level. Long cues (300 or 600 ms) raised thresholds by 5.3 dB when the signal and cue overlapped and by 5.1 dB in FI and 3.2 dB in BI when cues and signals were separated by 40 ms. Short cues (40 ms) raised thresholds by 4.5 dB in FI and 4.0 dB in BI for separations of 7 to 40 ms, but by similar to 13 dB when simultaneous and in phase. FI and BI are comparable in magnitude and hardly increase when the signal is close in time to abrupt cue transients. These results do not support the notion that masking of the signal is due to the contralateral cue onset/offset transient response. Instead, sluggish attention or temporal integration may explain contralateral proximal interference.
format Article
author Reeves, Adam
Seluakumaran, Kumar
Scharf, Bertram
author_facet Reeves, Adam
Seluakumaran, Kumar
Scharf, Bertram
author_sort Reeves, Adam
title Contralateral proximal interference
title_short Contralateral proximal interference
title_full Contralateral proximal interference
title_fullStr Contralateral proximal interference
title_full_unstemmed Contralateral proximal interference
title_sort contralateral proximal interference
publisher Acoustical Soc Amer Amer Inst Physics
publishDate 2021
url http://eprints.um.edu.my/26985/
_version_ 1735409484443942912
score 13.214269