Selective spatial attention modulates bottom-up informational masking of speech

Scientific Reports

Volumn 5, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Carlile, Simon ^a   Corkhill, Caitlin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SPEECH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84923882000     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep08662     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Carlile, S. Active listening: Speech intelligibility in noisy environments. Acoust. Aust. 42, 98-104 (2014).
2. Kidd, G. Jr., Mason, C., Richards, V., Gallun, F. & Durlach, N. in Auditory Perception of Sound Sources Vol. 29 Springer Handbook of Auditory Research (eds William, A. Yost, Arthur, N. Popper & Richard, R. Fay) Ch. 6, 143-189 (Springer US, 2008).
3. Brungart, D., Simpson, B. D., Ericson, M. & Scott, K. Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 110, 2527-2538 (2001).
4. Arbogast, T. L., Mason, C. R. & Kidd, G. The effect of spatial separation on informational and energetic masking of speech. J Acoust Soc Am 112, 2086-2098 (2002).
5. Bregman,A. S. Auditory scene analysis: the perceptual organization of sound. (MIT Press, 1990).
6. Brouwer, S., Van Engen, K. J., Calandruccio, L. & Bradlow, A. R. Linguistic contributions to speech-on-speech masking for native and non-native listeners: Language familiarity and semantic content. J Acoust Soc Am 131, 1449-1464, doi:10.1121/1.3675943 (2012).
7. Freyman, R. L., Balakrishnan, U. & Helfer, K. S. Effect of number of masking talkers and auditory priming on informational masking in speech recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 115, 2246-2256 (2004).
8. Kitterick, P. T., Bailey, P. J. & Summerfield, A. Q. Benefits of knowing who, where, and when inmulti-talker listening. J Acoust Soc Am 127, 2498-2508, doi:10.1121/1.3327507 (2010).
9. Kidd, G., Arbogast, T. L., Mason, C. R. & Gallun, F. J. The advantage of knowing where to listen. J Acoust Soc Am 118, 3804-3815 (2005).
10. Varghese, L. A., Ozmeral, E. J., Best, V. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. How Visual Cues for when to Listen Aid Selective Auditory Attention. JARO 13, 359-368, doi:10.1007/s10162-012-0314-7 (2012).
11. Freyman, R. L., Helfer, K. S., McCall, D. D. & Clifton, R. K. The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech. J Acoust Soc Am 106, 3578-3588 (1999).
12. Freyman, R. L., Balakrishnan, U.& Helfer, K. S. Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 109, 2112-2122 (2001).
13. Shinn-Cunningham, B. G.Object-based auditory and visual attention. Trends Cog Sci 12, 182-186, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.003 (2008).
14. Schwartz, A. H. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. Dissociation of perceptual judgments of "what" and "where" in an ambiguous auditory scene. J Acoust Soc Am 128, 3041-3051, doi:10.1121/1.3495942 (2010).
15. Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., Lee, A. K. C. & Oxenham, A. J. A sound element gets lost in perceptual competition. PNAS 104, 12223-12227, doi:10.1073/pnas.0704641104 (2007).
16. Knudsen, E. I. Fundamental components of attention. Ann Rev Neurosci 30, 57-78, doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.30.051606.094256 (2007).
17. Brungart, D. S., Simpson, B. D., Darwin, C. J., Arbogast, T. L. & Kidd, G. Acrossear interference from parametrically degraded synthetic speech signals in a dichotic cocktail-party listening task. J Acoust Soc Am 117, 292-304 (2005).
18. Brungart, D. S. & Simpson, B. D. Within-ear and across-ear interference in a cocktail party listening task. J Acoust Soc Am 112, 2985-2995 (2002).
19. Gallun, F. J., Mason, C. R. & Kidd, G. The ability to listen with independent ears. J Acoust Soc Am 122, 2814-2825 (2008).
20. Rhebergen, K. S., Versfeld, N. J. & Dreschler, W. A. Release from informational masking in time reversal of native and non-native interfering speech (L). J Acoust Soc Am 118, 1274-1277 (2005).
21. Cooke, M., Lecumberri, M. L. G. & Barker, J. The foreign language cocktail party problem: Energetic and informational masking effects in non-native speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 123, 414-427, doi:10.1121/1.2804952 (2008).
22. Chen, J., Li, H., Li, L.,Wu, X. & Moore, B. C. J. Informational masking of speech produced by speech-like sounds without linguistic content. J Acoust Soc Am 131, 2914-2926, doi:10.1121/1.3688510 (2012).
23. Stone, M. A., Fuellgrabe, C. &Moore, B. C. J. Notionally steady background noise acts primarily as a modulation masker of speech. J Acoust Soc Am 132, 317-326, doi:10.1121/1.4725766 (2012).
24. Stone, M. A., Fuellgrabe, C., Mackinnon, R. C. & Moore, B. C. J. The importance for speech intelligibility of random fluctuations in "steady" background noise. J Acoust Soc Am 130, 2874-2881, doi:10.1121/1.3641371 (2011).
25. Stone, M. A. & Moore, B. C. J. On the near non-existence of "pure" energetic masking release for speech. J Acoust Soc Am 135, 1967-1977, doi:10.1121/1.4868392 (2014).
26. Aubanel, V. & Cooke, M. Strategies adopted by talkers faced with fluctuating and competing-speech maskers. J Acoust Soc Am 134, 2884-2894, doi:doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4818757 (2013).
27. Cooke, M. P. A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 119, 1562-1573 (2006).
28. Brungart, D. S. & Iyer, N. Better-ear glimpsing efficiency with symmetrically-placed interfering talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 132, 2545-2556, doi:10.1121/1.4747005 (2012).
29. Glyde, H. et al. The effects of better ear glimpsing on spatial release from masking. J Acoust Soc Am 134, 2937-2945 (2013).
30. Warren, R. M. Perceptual restoration of missing speech sounds. Science 167, 392- &, doi:10.1126/science.167.3917.392 (1970).
31. Warren, R. M., Hainsworth, K. R., Brubaker, B. S., Bashford, J. A. & Healy, E. W. Spectral restoration of speech: Intelligibility is increased by inserting noise in spectral gaps. Percept Psychophys 59, 275-283, doi:10.3758/bf03211895 (1997).
32. Warren, R. M., Bashford, J. A., Healy, E. W. & Brubaker, B. S. Auditory induction: Recriprocal changes in alternating sounds. Percept Psychophys 55, 313-322, doi:10.3758/bf03207602 (1994).
33. Bashford, J. A.,Warren, R. M.&Brown, C. A. Use of speech-modulated noise adds strong "bottom-up" cues for phonemic restoration. Percep Psychophys 58, 342-350, doi:10.3758/bf03206810 (1996).
34. Hawley,M. L., Litovsky, R. Y. & Culling, J. F. The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: effect of location and type of interferer. J Acoust Soc Am 115, 833-843 (2004).
35. Best, V., Ozmeral, E., Gallun, F. J., Sen, K. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. Spatial unmasking of birdsong in human listeners: Energetic and informational factors. J Acoust Soc Am 118, 3766-3773 (2005).
36. Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., Ihlefeld, A., Satyavarta & Larson, E. Bottom-up and top-down influences on spatial unmasking. Acta Acustica United with Acustica 91, 967-979 (2005).
37. Edmonds, B. A. & Culling, J. F. The spatial unmaksing of speach: Evdence for better ear listening. J Acoust Soc Am 120, 1539-1545 (2006).
38. Zurek, P. M. in Acoustical Factors affecting hearing aid performance (eds Studebaker, G. & Hockberg, I.) 255-276 (Allyn and Bacon, 1993).
39. Carlile, S. & Pralong, D. The location-dependent nature of perceptually salient features of the human head-related transfer function. J Acoust Soc Am 95, 3445-3459 (1994).
40. Best, V., Marrone, N., Mason, C. R. & Kidd, G. Jr. The influence of non-spatial factors on measures of spatial release from masking. J Acoust Soc Am 131, 3103-3110, doi:10.1121/1.3693656 (2012).
41. Best, V., Carlile, S., Jin, C. & van Schaik, A. The role of high frequencies in speech localization. J Acoust Soc Am 118, 353-363 (2005).
42. S3.5, A. Methods for the calculation of the articulation index. (New York, 1969).
43. Marrone, N., Mason, C. R. & Kidd, G. Jr. Tuning in the spatial dimension: Evidence from a masked speech identification task. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 124, 1146-1158, doi:10.1121/1.2945710 (2008).
44. Ruggles, D., Bharadwaj, H. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication. PNAS 108, 15516-15521, doi:10.1073/pnas.1108912108 (2011).
45. Ruggles, D. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. Spatial Selective Auditory Attention in the Presence of Reverberant Energy: Individual Differences in Normal-Hearing Listeners. JARO 12, 395-405, doi:10.1007/s10162-010-0254-z (2011).
46. Ruggles, D., Bharadwaj, H. & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. Why Middle-Aged Listeners Have Trouble Hearing in Everyday Settings. Current biology: CB 22, 1417-1422, doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.05.025 (2012).
47. Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F. G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J. & Ekelid, M. Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues. Science 270, 303-304 (1995).
48. Dorman, M. F., Loizou, P. C. & Rainey, D. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am 102, 2403-2411 (1997).
49. Darwin, C. J. Listening to speech in the presence of other sounds. Phil Trans Roy Soc B: Biol Sci 363, 1011-1021, doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2156 (2008).
50. Mesgarani, N., Cheung, C., Johnson, K. & Chang, E. F. Phonetic Feature Encoding in Human Superior Temporal Gyrus. Science 343, 1006-1010, doi:10.1126/science.1245994 (2014).
51. Grodzinsky, Y. & Nelken, I. The Neural Code That Makes Us Human. Science 343, 978-979, doi:10.1126/science.1251495 (2014).
52. Mesgarani, N. & Chang, E. F. Selective cortical representation of attended speaker in multi-talker speech perception. Nature 485, 233-U118, doi:10.1038/nature11020 (2012).
53. Zion-Golumbic, E. & Schroeder, C. E. Attention modulates 'speech-tracking' at a cocktail party. Trends Cog. Sci. 16, 363-364, doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.05.004 (2012).
54. Ding, N. & Simon, J. Z. Emergence of neural encoding of auditory objects while listening to competing speakers. PNAS 109, 11854-11859, doi:10.1073/pnas.1205381109 (2012).
55. Golumbic, E. M. Z. et al. Mechanisms Underlying Selective Neuronal Tracking of Attended Speech at a "Cocktail Party" Neuron 77, 980-991, doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.037 (2013).
56. Bolia, R. S., Nelson, W. T., Ericson, M. A. & Simpson, B. D. A speech corpus for multitalker communication research. J Acoust Soc Am 107, 1065-1066 (2000).
57. Moore, B. C. J. & Glasberg, B. R. A revision of Zwicker's loudness model. Acta Acustica 82, 335-345 (1996).
58. Pralong, D. & Carlile, S. in Virtual auditory space: Generation and applications. (ed Carlile, S.) Ch. 4, p109-151 (Landes, 1996).
59. Jin, C., Corderoy, A., Carlile, S. & Schaik, A. Contrasting Monaural and Interaural Spectral Cues for Human Sound Localisation. J Acoust Soc Am 115, 3124-3141 (2004).
60. Middlebrooks, J. C.&Green, D. M. Directional dependence of interaural envelope delays. J Acoust Soc Am 87, 2149-2162 (1990).
61. Watson, A. B. Probability summation over time. Vis Res 19, 515-522 (1979).
62. Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. An introduction to the bootstrap. (Chapman-Hall, 1993).
63. Davison, A. C. & Hinkley, D. V. Bootstrap methods and their application. (Cambridge University Press, 1997).