Carlyon R P
Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, England.
J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Feb;95(2):949-61. doi: 10.1121/1.410012.
Previously, Carlyon [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 89, 329-340 (1991)] argued that there exists no across-frequency mechanism specific to the detection of frequency modulation (FM) incoherence, defined as a difference in FM phase, between pairs of resolved frequency components. Experiments are described which attempted to reconcile this conclusion with the results of two recent studies. Wilson et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 1333-1338 (1990)] reported that the detection of FM imposed on a target component was impaired by the presence of an FM "interfering tone," and that the size of the effect depended on the FM coherence between interferer and target. Experiment 1 replicated their findings but showed, by using low-pass and wideband noise, that its dependence on FM coherence was consistent with the detection of combination tones and of beating between the interferer and target. Cohen and Chen [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 92, 766-722 (1992)] reported that the detection threshold for an FM signal was higher when it was masked by two components modulated coherently with it than when the masker and signal modulations were incoherent. Experiment 2 showed that, when the masker consisted of eight components, thresholds were largely determined by the modulation coherence between the signal and the masker component closest to it in frequency. Experiment 3 presented evidence that Cohen and Chen's findings were influenced by harmonicity between the masker and signal, even in conditions which attempted to control it. Experiment 4 replicated another of Cohen and Chen's findings, that when the masker modulation was held constant and the signal FM depth varied, some listeners' thresholds reached a maximum when the masker and signal FM depths were equal. By manipulating the frequency ratio between masker and signal, it was shown that this finding, too, could be attributed to harmonicity between the signal and one of the masker components. Finally, experiment 5 replicated Carlyon's (1991) findings at a higher sensation level and with a different pattern of modulation than used previously.
此前，卡里昂[《美国声学学会杂志》89, 329 - 340 (1991)]认为，对于分辨频率成分对之间的频率调制（FM）不一致性（定义为FM相位差）的检测，不存在特定的跨频率机制。本文描述了一些实验，试图使这一结论与最近两项研究的结果相协调。威尔逊等人[《美国声学学会杂志》88, 1333 - 1338 (1990)]报告称，目标成分上施加的FM检测会因FM“干扰音”的存在而受损，且该效应的大小取决于干扰音与目标之间的FM相干性。实验1重复了他们的发现，但通过使用低通和宽带噪声表明，其对FM相干性的依赖与组合音的检测以及干扰音与目标之间的拍频检测是一致的。科恩和陈[《美国声学学会杂志》92, 766 - 722 (1992)]报告称，当FM信号被与其相干调制的两个成分掩蔽时，其检测阈值高于掩蔽器和信号调制不相干时的阈值。实验2表明，当掩蔽器由八个成分组成时，阈值在很大程度上由信号与频率上最接近它的掩蔽器成分之间的调制相干性决定。实验3提供的证据表明，即使在试图控制的条件下，科恩和陈的发现也受到掩蔽器与信号之间谐波性的影响。实验4重复了科恩和陈的另一项发现，即当掩蔽器调制保持不变且信号FM深度变化时，当掩蔽器和信号FM深度相等时，一些听众的阈值达到最大值。通过操纵掩蔽器与信号之间的频率比表明，这一发现同样可归因于信号与掩蔽器成分之一之间的谐波性。最后，实验5在更高的感觉水平上并采用与之前不同的调制模式重复了卡里昂（1991）的发现。
