Schneider B A, Pichora-Fuller M K, Kowalchuk D, Lamb M
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.
J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Feb;95(2):980-91. doi: 10.1121/1.408403.
Thresholds for detecting a gap between two Gaussian-enveloped (standard deviation = 0.5 ms), 2-kHz tones were determined in young and old listeners. The gap-detection thresholds of old adults were more variable and about twice as large as those obtained from young adults. Moreover, gap-detection thresholds were not correlated with audiometric thresholds in either group. Estimates of the width of the temporal window of young subjects, based on the detection of a gap between two tone pips, were smaller than those typically obtained when a relatively long duration pure tone is interrupted [Moore et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 1266-1275 (1989)]. Because the amount of time it takes to recover from an adapting stimulus is likely to affect gap detection thresholds [Glasberg et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 81, 1546-1556 (1987)], smaller estimates of temporal window size would be expected in this paradigm if the amount of adaptation produced by the first tone pip was negligible. The larger gap-detection thresholds of old subjects indicate that they may have larger temporal windows than young subjects. The lack of correlation between audiometric and gap-detection thresholds indicates that this loss of temporal acuity is not related to the degree of sensorineural hearing loss. In a second experiment on the precedence effect using the same subjects, a Gaussian-enveloped tone was presented over earphones to the left ear followed by the same tone pip presented to the right ear. To more realistically approximate a sound field situation, the tone pip presented to each ear was followed 0.6 ms later by an attenuated version presented to the contralateral ear. The delay between the left- and right-ear tone-pips was varied and the transition point between hearing a single tone on the left, and hearing two such sounds in close succession (one coming from the left and the other from the right) was determined. The transition point in this experiment did not differ between young and old subjects nor were these transition points correlated with gap-detection thresholds. These results indicate that monaural temporal acuity and binaural echo suppression may be based on different processes.
在年轻和年长的听众中确定了检测两个高斯包络(标准差 = 0.5 毫秒)、2 千赫兹纯音之间间隙的阈值。年长成年人的间隙检测阈值更具变异性,大约是年轻成年人的两倍。此外,两组的间隙检测阈值与听力阈值均无相关性。基于检测两个音脉冲之间的间隙,对年轻受试者时间窗口宽度的估计小于当相对长时程纯音被中断时通常获得的估计值[Moore 等人,《美国声学学会杂志》85, 1266 - 1275 (1989)]。因为从适应刺激中恢复所需的时间量可能会影响间隙检测阈值[Glasberg 等人,《美国声学学会杂志》81, 1546 - 1556 (1987)],如果第一个音脉冲产生的适应量可忽略不计,那么在此范式中预计时间窗口大小的估计值会更小。年长受试者较大的间隙检测阈值表明他们可能比年轻受试者有更大的时间窗口。听力阈值与间隙检测阈值之间缺乏相关性表明这种时间敏锐度的丧失与感音神经性听力损失的程度无关。在使用相同受试者进行的关于优先效应的第二个实验中,通过耳机向左耳呈现一个高斯包络的纯音,随后向右耳呈现相同的音脉冲。为了更逼真地模拟声场情况,向每只耳朵呈现的音脉冲之后 0.6 毫秒,向对侧耳朵呈现一个衰减版本。左右耳音脉冲之间的延迟是变化的,并且确定了听到左耳上的单个纯音与紧接着听到两个这样的声音(一个来自左,另一个来自右)之间的转变点。在这个实验中,年轻和年长受试者之间的转变点没有差异,并且这些转变点与间隙检测阈值也没有相关性。这些结果表明单耳时间敏锐度和双耳回声抑制可能基于不同的过程。