Cargando…

Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)

Susceptibility to remote-frequency masking in children and adults was evaluated with respect to three stimulus features: (1) masker bandwidth, (2) spectral separation of the signal and masker, and (3) gated versus continuous masker presentation. Listeners were 4- to 6-year-olds, 7- to 10-year-olds,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leibold, Lori J., Buss, Emily
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Acoustical Society of America 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5392082/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28040030
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4971780
_version_ 1783229392702406656
author Leibold, Lori J.
Buss, Emily
author_facet Leibold, Lori J.
Buss, Emily
author_sort Leibold, Lori J.
collection PubMed
description Susceptibility to remote-frequency masking in children and adults was evaluated with respect to three stimulus features: (1) masker bandwidth, (2) spectral separation of the signal and masker, and (3) gated versus continuous masker presentation. Listeners were 4- to 6-year-olds, 7- to 10-year-olds, and adults. Detection thresholds for a 500-ms, 2000-Hz signal were estimated in quiet or presented with a band of noise in one of four frequency regions: 425–500 Hz, 4000–4075 Hz, 8000–8075 Hz, or 4000–10 000 Hz. In experiment 1, maskers were gated on in each 500-ms interval of a three-interval, forced-choice adaptive procedure. Masking was observed for all ages in all maskers, but the greatest masking was observed for the 4000–4075 Hz masker. These findings suggest that signal/masker spectral proximity plays an important role in remote-frequency masking, even when peripheral excitation associated with the signal and masker does not overlap. Younger children tended to have more masking than older children or adults, consistent with a reduced ability to segregate simultaneous sounds and/or listen in a frequency-selective manner. In experiment 2, detection thresholds were estimated in the same noises, but maskers were presented continuously. Masking was reduced for all ages relative to gated conditions, suggesting improved segregation and/or frequency-selective listening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5392082
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Acoustical Society of America
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53920822017-04-17 Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa) Leibold, Lori J. Buss, Emily J Acoust Soc Am Psychological and Physiological Acoustics Susceptibility to remote-frequency masking in children and adults was evaluated with respect to three stimulus features: (1) masker bandwidth, (2) spectral separation of the signal and masker, and (3) gated versus continuous masker presentation. Listeners were 4- to 6-year-olds, 7- to 10-year-olds, and adults. Detection thresholds for a 500-ms, 2000-Hz signal were estimated in quiet or presented with a band of noise in one of four frequency regions: 425–500 Hz, 4000–4075 Hz, 8000–8075 Hz, or 4000–10 000 Hz. In experiment 1, maskers were gated on in each 500-ms interval of a three-interval, forced-choice adaptive procedure. Masking was observed for all ages in all maskers, but the greatest masking was observed for the 4000–4075 Hz masker. These findings suggest that signal/masker spectral proximity plays an important role in remote-frequency masking, even when peripheral excitation associated with the signal and masker does not overlap. Younger children tended to have more masking than older children or adults, consistent with a reduced ability to segregate simultaneous sounds and/or listen in a frequency-selective manner. In experiment 2, detection thresholds were estimated in the same noises, but maskers were presented continuously. Masking was reduced for all ages relative to gated conditions, suggesting improved segregation and/or frequency-selective listening. Acoustical Society of America 2016-12 2016-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5392082/ /pubmed/28040030 http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4971780 Text en © 2016 Acoustical Society of America. 0001-4966/2016/140(6)/4367/11/$30.00 All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Psychological and Physiological Acoustics
Leibold, Lori J.
Buss, Emily
Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title_full Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title_fullStr Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title_full_unstemmed Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title_short Factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
title_sort factors responsible for remote-frequency masking in children and adultsa)
topic Psychological and Physiological Acoustics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5392082/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28040030
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4971780
work_keys_str_mv AT leiboldlorij factorsresponsibleforremotefrequencymaskinginchildrenandadultsa
AT bussemily factorsresponsibleforremotefrequencymaskinginchildrenandadultsa