A composite randomization procedure for measuring spectral shape discrimination

On the choice of adequate randomization ranges for limiting the use of unwanted cues in same-different, dual-pair, and oddity tasks

A major concern when designing a psychophysical experiment is that participants may use a stimulus feature (cue) other than that intended by the experimenter. One way to avoid this problem is to apply random variations to the corresponding feature across stimulus presentations to make the unwanted cue unreliable. An important question facing experimenters who use this randomization (roving) technique is how large the randomization range should be to ensure that the participants cannot achieve a certain proportion correct by using the unwanted cue, while at the same time avoiding unnecessary interference of the randomization with task performance. Previous researchers have provided formulas for the selection of adequate randomization ranges in yes-no and multiple-alternative forced choice tasks. In this article, we provide figures and tables that can be used to select randomization ranges that are better suited to experiments involving a same-different, dual-pair, or oddity task.

Limiting unwanted cues via random rove applied to the yes-no and multiple-alternative forced choice paradigms

When a random rove is used in a perceptual task to control the influence of an unwanted cue that may confound the decision strategy of primary interest, the effectiveness of the rove is determined by its range. Green [Profile Analysis (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1988)] provided a formula which allows experimenters to determine the roving range required to ensure that the listeners relying on the unwanted cue cannot exceed a pre-defined percentage of correct responses in a two-interval, two-alternative forced-choice experiment. Here, Green's analysis is extended to the yes-no and m-alternative, forced-choice paradigms (m>2).

On suppressing unwanted cues via randomization

In certain perceptual discrimination tasks, a change in a particular stimulus variable can be perceived as changes along multiple perceptual dimensions. If the study is primarily concerned with a particular perceptual dimension or cue, it is important that the experimenter keep the influences of the other unwanted but correlated perceptual cues under control. One way to accomplish this objective is to randomize the stimuli along the stimulus dimensions primarily associated with these unwanted cues, making them unreliable as a basis for the discrimination. This theoretical note presents a mathematical proof that a uniform randomization is the most effective way of suppressing unwanted cues.

Spectral shape discrimination by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners

The ability to discriminate between sounds with different spectral shapes was evaluated for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Listeners discriminated between a standard stimulus and a signal stimulus in which half of the standard components were decreased in level and half were increased in level. In one condition, the standard stimulus was the sum of six equal-amplitude tones (equal-SPL), and in another the standard stimulus was the sum of six tones at equal sensation levels re: audiometric thresholds for individual subjects (equal-SL). Spectral weights were estimated in conditions where the amplitudes of the individual tones were perturbed slightly on every presentation. Sensitivity was similar in all conditions for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The presence of perturbation and equal-SL components increased thresholds for both groups, but only small differences in weighting strategy were measured between the groups depending on whether the equal-SPL or equal-SL condition was tested. The average data suggest that normal-hearing listeners may rely more on the central components of the spectrum whereas hearing-impaired listeners may have been more likely to use the edges. However, individual weighting functions were quite variable, especially for the HI listeners, perhaps reflecting difficulty in processing changes in spectral shape due to hearing loss. Differences in weighting strategy without changes in sensitivity suggest that factors other than spectral weights, such as internal noise or difficulty encoding a reference stimulus, also may dominate performance.

Temporal integration at 6 kHz as a function of masker bandwidth

Thresholds were measured for a 6-kHz sinusoidal signal presented within a 500-ms masker. The masker was either a bandpass Gaussian noise of varying bandwidth, or a sinusoid of the same frequency as the signal. The spectrum level of the noise masker was kept constant at 20 dB SPL, and the level of the sinusoidal masker was 40 dB SPL. Thresholds for signal durations between 2 and 300 ms were measured for masker bandwidths ranging from 60 to 12,000 Hz. The masker was spectrally centered around 6 kHz. For masker bandwidths less than 600 Hz, the slope of the temporal integration function decreased with decreasing masker bandwidth. The results are not consistent with current models of temporal integration or temporal resolution. It is suggested that the results at narrow bandwidths can be understood in terms of changes in the power spectrum of the stimulus envelope or modulation spectrum. According to this view, the onset and offset ramps of the signal introduce detectable high-frequency components into the modulation spectrum, which provide a salient cue in narrowband maskers. For broadband maskers, these high-frequency components are masked by the inherent rapid fluctuations in the masker envelope. Additionally, for signal durations between 7 and 80 ms, signal thresholds decreased by up to 5 dB as the masker bandwidth increased from 1200 to 12,000 Hz. The mechanisms underlying this effect are not yet fully understood.