Recalibrating the Auditory System: A Speed-accuracy Analysis of Intensity Perception

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 523-536

  Arieh, Yoav ^a,b   Marks, Lawrence E ^a,b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JOHN B PIERCE LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; REACTION TIME; REVIEW;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 0043016646     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.523     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Arieh, Y., & Marks, L. E. (2002). Context effects in visual length perception: Role of ocular, retinal, and spatial location. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 478-492.
2. Armstrong, L., & Marks, L. E. (1997). Stimulus context, perceived length, and the horizontal-vertical illusion. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 1200-1213.
3. Botte, M. C., Charron, S., & Bouayad, H. (1993). Temporary threshold and loudness shifts: Frequency patterns and correlations. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 93, 1524-1534.
4. Botte, M. C., & Mönikheim, S. (1994). New data on short-term effects of tone exposure. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 95, 2598-2605.
5. Cattell, J. M. (1886). The influence of the intensity of the stimulus on the length of reaction time. Brain, 8, 512-515.
6. Chocholle, R. (1940). Variations des temps de réaction auditifs en fonction de l'Intensité à diverses fréquences [Variations in auditory reaction times as a function of intensity at different frequencies]. L'Année Psychologique, 41, 65-124.
7. Chocholle, R., & Greenbaum, H. B. (1966). La sonie de sons purs partiellement masqués: Étude comparative par une méthode d'Égalisation et par la méthode des temps de reaction [Loudness of partially masked pure tones: Comparative study by an equalization method and by the reaction time method]. Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique, 63, 387-414.
8. Fletcher, H., & Munson, W. A. (1933). Loudness, its definition, measurement and calculation. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 5, 82-108.
9. Green, D. M., & Luce, R. D. (1971). Detection of auditory signals presented at random times. Perception & Psychophysics, 9, 257-268.
10. Grice, G. R. (1968). Stimulus intensity and response evocation. Psychological Review, 75, 359-373.
11. Keuss, P. J. G., & van der Molen, M. W. (1982). Positive and negative effects of stimulus intensity in auditory reaction tasks: Further studies on immediate arousal. Acta Psychologca 52, 61-72.
12. Kohfeld, D. L. (1971). Simple reaction time as a function of stimulus in decibels of light and sound. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 251-257.
13. Kohfeld, D. L., Santee, J. L., & Wallace, N. D. (1981). Loudness and reaction time: I. Perception & Psychophysics, 29, 535-549.
14. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Luce, R. D., & Green, D. M. (1972). A neural timing theory for response time and the psychophysics of intensity. Psychological Review, 79, 14-57.
16. Mapes-Riordan, D., & Yost, W. A. (1999). Loudness recalibration as a function of level. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 106, 3506-3511.
17. Marks, L. E. (1988). Magnitude estimation and sensory matching. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 511-525.
18. Marks, L. E. (1992). The slippery context effects in psychophysics: Intensive, extensive, and qualitative continua. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 187-198.
19. Marks, L. E. (1993). Contextual processing of multidimensional and unidimensional auditory stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 227-249.
20. Marks, L. E. (1994). "Recalibrating" the auditory system: The perception of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 382-396.
21. Marks, L. E. (1996). Recalibrating the perception of loudness: Interaural transfer. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100, 473-480.
22. Marks, L. E., & Armstrong, L. (1996). Haptic and visual representations of space. In T. Inui & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Attention and performance XVI: Integration information in perception and communication (pp. 263-287). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Marks, L. E., & Warner, E. (1991). Slippery context effect and critical bands. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 986-996.
24. Murray, H. G. (1970). Stimulus intensity and reaction time: Evaluation of a decision-theory model. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84, 383-392.
25. Nissen, M. J. (1977). Stimulus intensity and information processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 22, 338-352.
26. Pachella, R. G. (1974). The interpretation of reaction time in information processing research. In B. Kantrowitz (Ed.), Human information: Tutorials in performance and cognition (pp. 41-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Parducci, A. (1965). Category judgment: A range-frequency model. Psychological Review, 72, 407-418.
28. Parker, S., Murphy, D. R., & Schneider, B. A. (2002). Top-down gain control in the auditory system: Evidence from identification and discrimination experiments. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 598-615.
29. Parker, S., & Schneider, B. A. (1994). The stimulus range effect: Evidence for top-down control of sensory intensity in audition. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 1-11.
30. Pew, R. W. (1969). The speed-accuracy operating characteristics. Acta Psychologica, 30, 16-26.
31. Pins, D., & Bonnet, C. (1996). On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Piéron's law and choice reaction time. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 390-400.
32. Rankin, K. M., & Marks, L. E. (1991). Differential context effects in taste perception. Chemical Senses, 16, 617-629.
33. Rankin, K. M., & Marks, L. E. (2000). Chemosensory context effects: Role of perceived similarity and neural commonality. Chemical Senses, 25, 747-759.
34. Sanford, A. J. (1972). Criterion effects in simple reaction time: Results with stimulus intensity and duration manipulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 95, 370-374.
35. Scharf, B. (1983). Loudness adaptation. In J. V. Tobias & E. D. Schubert (Eds.), Hearing: Research and theory (Vol. 2, pp. 1-56). New York: Academic Press.
36. Schneider, B., & Parker, S. (1990). Does stimulus context affect loudness or only loudness judgment? Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 409-418.
37. Stevens, J. C., & Marks, L. E. (1980). Cross-modality matching functions generated by the method of magnitude estimation. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 379-389.
38. Teghtsoonian, R. (1973). Range effects in psychophysical scaling and a revision of Stevens's law. American Journal of Psychology, 86, 3-27.
39. Thomas, E. A. C. (1967). Reaction time studies: The anticipation and interaction of responses. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 20, 1-29.
40. van der Molen, M. W., & Keuss, P. J. G. (1979). The relationship between reaction time and auditory intensity in discrete auditory tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 95-102.
41. Ward, W. D. (1973). Adaptation and fatigue. In J. Jerger (Ed.), Modern developments in audiology (2nd ed., pp. 301-344). New York: Academic Press.
42. Yellott, J. I., Jr. (1971). Correction for guessing and the speed-accuracy tradeoff in choice reaction time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 8, 159-199.