Identification variability as a measure of loudness: An application to gender differences

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 64-70

  Sagi, Elad ^a   D'Alessandro, Lisa M ^b   Norwich, Kenneth H ^b  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; STANDARD;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; WEIGHTS AND MEASURES;

EID: 34250665459     PISSN: 11961961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/cjep2007007     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Cacace, A. T., McClelland, W. A., Weiner, J., & McFarland, D. J. (1996). Individual differences and the reliability of 2F1-F2 distortion-product otoacoustic emissions: Effects of time-of-day, stimulus variables, and gender. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 39, 1138-1148.
2. Chung, D. Y., Mason, K., Gannon, R. P., & Wilson, G. N. (1983). The ear effect as a function of age and hearing loss. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 73, 1277-1282.
3. Don, M., Ponton, C. W., Eggermont, J. J., & Masuda, A. (1993). Gender differences in cochlear response time: An explanation for gender amplitude differences in the unmasked auditory brain-stem response. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 2135-2148.
4. Dunckley, K. T., & Dreisbeck, L. E. (2004). Gender effects on high frequency distortion product otoacoustic emissions in humans. Ear & Hearing, 25, 554-564.
5. Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 372-383.
6. Garner, W. R., & Hake, H. W. (1951). The amount of information in absolute judgments. Psychological Review, 58, 446-459.
7. Glantz, S. A., & Slinker, B. K. (1990). Primer of applied regression. New York: McGraw-Hill.
8. Hellman, R. P., & Zwislocki, J. J. (1961). Some factors affecting the estimation of loudness. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 33, 687-694.
9. Langford, T. L. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to interaural disparities of time and level. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(Suppl. 1), 3256.
10. Luce, R. D., Green, D. M., & Weber, D. L. (1976). Attention bands in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 49-54.
11. Luce, R. D., & Mo, S. S. (1965). Magnitude estimation of heaviness and loudness by individual subjects: A test of a probabilistic response theory. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 18, 159-174.
12. Marks, L. E. (1974). Sensory processes: The new psychophysics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Matthews, L. J., Lee, F. S., Mills, J. H., & Dubno, J. R. (1997). Extended high-frequency thresholds in older adults. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 40, 208-214.
14. McFadden, D. (1998). Sex differences in the auditory system. Developmental Neuropsychology, 14, 261-298.
15. McFadden, D., Loehlin, J. C., & Pasanen, E. G. (1996). Additional findings on heritability and prenatal masculinization of cochlear mechanisms: Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Hearing Research, 97, 102-119.
16. McGuinness, D. (1974). Equating individual differences for auditory input. Psychophysiology, 11, 113-120.
17. Mori, S., & Ward, L. M. (1995). Pure effects of feedback in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1065-1079.
18. Norwich, K. H. (1993). Information, sensation and perception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
19. Norwich, K. H., & Sagi, E. (2002). Deriving the loudness exponent from categorical judgements. Perception and Psychophysics, 64(5), 804-814.
20. Norwich, K. H., Wong, W., & Sagi, E. (1998). Range as a factor determining the information of loudness judgments: Overcoming small sample bias. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 63-70.
21. Robinson, D. W., & Dadson, R. S. (1956). A re-determination of the equal-loudness relations for pure tones. British Journal of Applied Physics, 7, 166-181.
22. Royster, L. H., Royster, J. D., & Thomas, W. G. (1980). Representative hearing levels by race and sex in North Carolina industry. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 68, 551-566.
23. Sagi, E., & Norwich, K. H. (2002). Weighing the anchor in categorization of sound level. Canadian Acoustics/Acoustique canadienne, 30, 15-24.
24. Snedecor, G. W., & Cochrane, W. G. (1967). Statistical methods, (6th Ed.). Ames, IA: The Iowa State University Press.
25. Stevens, S. S. (1961). To honor Fechner and repeal his law. Science, 133, 80-86.
26. Suzuki, Y., & Takeshima, H. (2004). Equal loudness level contours for pure tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 918-933.
27. Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review, 34, 273-286.
28. Ward, L. M. (1990). Critical bands and mixed-frequency scaling: Sequential dependencies, equal-loudness contours, and power function exponents. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 551-562.
29. Wong, W., & Norwich, K. H. (1997). Simulation of human sensory performance. Biosystems, 43, 189-197.