No Access Submitted: 13 June 2000 Accepted: 25 November 2000 Published Online: 01 February 2001
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, 686 (2001);
more...View Contributors
  • Robert P. Carlyon
  • Laurent Demany
  • John Deeks
Two experiments examined the relationship between temporal pitch (and, more generally, rate) perception and auditory lateralization. Both used dichotic pulse trains that were filtered into the same high (3900–5400-Hz) frequency region in order to eliminate place-of-excitation cues. In experiment 1, a 1-s periodic pulse train of rate Fr was presented to one ear, and a pulse train of rate 2Fr was presented to the other. In the “synchronous” condition, every other pulse in the 2Fr train was simultaneous with a pulse in the opposite ear. In each trial, subjects concentrated on one of the two binaural images produced by this mixture: they matched its perceived location by adjusting the interaural level difference (ILD) of a bandpass noise, and its rate/pitch was then matched by adjusting the rate of a regular pulse train. The results showed that at low Fr (e.g., 2 Hz), subjects heard two pulse trains of rate Fr, one in the “higher rate” ear, and one in the middle of the head. At higher Fr (>25 Hz) subjects heard two pulse trains on opposite sides of the midline, with the image on the higher rate side having a higher pitch than that on the “lower rate” side. The results were compared to those in a control condition, in which the pulses in the two ears were asynchronous. This comparison revealed a duplex region at Fr>25 Hz, where across-ear synchrony still affected the perceived locations of the pulse trains, but did not affect their pitches. Experiment 2 used a 1.4-s 200-Hz dichotic pulse train, whose first 0.7 s contained a constant interaural time difference (ITD), after which the sign of the ITD alternated between subsequent pulses. Subjects matched the location and then the pitch of the “new” sound that started halfway through the pulse train. The matched location became more lateralized with increasing ITD, but subjects always matched a pitch near 200 Hz, even though the rate of pulses sharing the new ITD was only 100 Hz. It is concluded from both experiments that temporal pitch perception is not driven by the output of binaural mechanisms.
  1. 1. Akerboom, S., ten Hoopen, G., Olierook, P., and van der Schaaf, T.(1983). “Auditory spatial alternation transforms auditory time,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 9, 882–897. Google ScholarCrossref
  2. 2. Akeroyd, M. A., and Summerfield, A. Q. (1998). “Predictions of signal thresholds in a frozen-noise masker using monaural and binaural temporal windows,” in Psychophysical and Physiological Advances in Hearing, edited by A. R. Palmer, A. Rees, A. Q. Summerfield, and R. Meddis (Whurr, London), pp. 433–439. Google Scholar
  3. 3. Akeroyd, M. A., and Summerfield, A. Q.(1999). “A binaural analog of gap detection,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 2807–2820. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  4. 4. Axelrod, S., Guzy, L. T., and Diamond, I. T.(1967). “Perceived rate of monotic and dichotically alternating clicks,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 43, 51–55. Google ScholarScitation
  5. 5. Beerends, J. G., and Houtsma, A. J. M.(1989). “Pitch identification of simultaneous diotic and dichotic two-tone complexes,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 813–819. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  6. 6. Blauert, J.(1972). “On the lag of lateralization caused by interaural time and intensity differences,” Audiology 11, 265–270. Google ScholarCrossref
  7. 7. Buell, T. N., Trahiotis, C., and Bernstein, L. R.(1991). “Lateralization of low-frequency tones: Relative potency of gating and ongoing interaural delays,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90, 3077–3085. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  8. 8. Culling, J. F., Summerfield, A. Q., and Marshall, D. H.(1998a). “Dichotic pitches as illusions of binaural unmasking. Huggins’ pitch and the binaural edge pitch,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 3509–3526. Google ScholarScitation
  9. 9. Culling, J. F., Summerfield, A. Q., and Marshall, D. H.(1998b). “Dichotic pitches as illusions of binaural unmasking. The Fourcin pitch and the dichotic repetition pitch,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 3527–3539. Google ScholarScitation
  10. 10. Culling, J. F., and Summerfield, Q.(1998). “Measurements of the binaural temporal window using a detection task,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 3540–3553. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  11. 11. Darwin, C. J., and Carlyon, R. P. (1995). “Auditory Grouping,” in Hearing, edited by B. C. J. Moore (Academic, Orlando), pp. 387–424. Google Scholar
  12. 12. Darwin, C. J., and Ciocca, V.(1992). “Grouping in pitch perception: Effects of onset asynchrony and ear of presentation of a mistuned component,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 3381–3390. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  13. 13. Darwin, C. J., and Hukin, R. W.(1999). “Auditory objects of attention: The role of interaural time differences,” J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 25, 617–629. Google ScholarCrossref, ISI
  14. 14. de Boer, E. (1956). “On the ‘Residue’ in Hearing,” Doctoral dissertation, Amsterdam. Google Scholar
  15. 15. de Boer, E. (1976). “On the ‘Residue’ and Auditory Pitch Perception,” in Handbook of Sensory Physiology, edited by W. D. Keindel and W. D. Neff (Springer, Berlin), Vol. 3, pp. 479–584. Google Scholar
  16. 16. Deutsch, D.(1974). “An auditory illusion,” Nature (London) 251, 307–309. Google ScholarCrossref
  17. 17. Deutsch, D.(1976). “Separate ‘what’ and ‘where’ decision mechanisms in processing a dichotic tonal sequence,” J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 2, 23–29. Google ScholarCrossref
  18. 18. Durlach, N. I. (1972). “Binaural signal detection: Equalization and cancellation theory,” in Foundations of Modern Auditory Theory, edited by J. V. Tobias (Academic, New York), Vol. II. Google Scholar
  19. 19. Dye, R. H., Stellmack, M. A., Grange, A. N., and Yost, W. A.(1996). “The effect of distractor frequency on judgments of target laterality based on interaural delays,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 1096–1107. Google ScholarScitation
  20. 20. Efron, R., and Yund, E. W.(1974). “Dichotic competition of simultaneous tones bursts of different frequency I. Dissociation of pitch from lateralization and loudness,” Neuropsychologia 12, 249–256. Google ScholarCrossref
  21. 21. Franssen, N. V. (1960). “Some considerations of the mechanisms of directional hearing,” Ph.D. thesis, Delft. Google Scholar
  22. 22. Freyman, R. L., Zurek, P. M., Balakrishnan, U., and Chiang, Y.-C.(1997). “Onset dominance in lateralization,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 1649–1659. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  23. 23. Gockel, H., and Carlyon, R. P.(1998). “Effects of ear of entry and perceived location of synchronous and asynchronous components on mistuning detection,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 3534–3545. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  24. 24. Gockel, H., Carlyon, R. P., and Micheyl, C.(1999). “Context dependence of fundamental frequency discrimination: Lateralized temporal fringes,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 3553–3563. Google ScholarScitation
  25. 25. Godsmark, D., and Brown, G. J.(1999). “A blackboard architecture for computational auditory scene analysis,” Speech Commun. 27, 351–366. Google ScholarCrossref
  26. 26. Grantham, D. W.(1984). “Detectability of varying interaural intensity differences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 71–76. Google ScholarScitation
  27. 27. Grantham, D. W. (1995). “Spatial Hearing and Related Phenomena,” in Hearing, edited by B. C. J. Moore (Academic, Orlando), pp. 297–346. Google Scholar
  28. 28. Grantham, D. W., and Wightman, F. L.(1978). “Detectability of varying interaural temporal differences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63, 511–523. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  29. 29. Guttman, N., and Pruzansky, S.(1962). “Lower limits of pitch and musical pitch,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 5, 207–214. Google ScholarCrossref
  30. 30. Hafter, E. F., and Dye, R. H.(1983). “Detection of interaural differences of time in trains of high-frequency clicks as a function of interclick interval and number,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73, 644–651. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  31. 31. Hafter, E. F., and Richards, V. M.(1988). “Discrimination of the rate of filtered impulses,” Percept. Psychophys. 43, 405–414. Google ScholarCrossref
  32. 32. Hartmann, W. M., and Johnson, D.(1991). “Stream segregation and peripheral channeling,” Music Percept. 9, 155–184. Google ScholarCrossref
  33. 33. Heller, L. M., and Trahiotis, C.(1996). “Extents of laterality and binaural interference effects,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 3632–3637. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  34. 34. Henning, G. B.(1974). “Detectability of interaural delay with high-frequency complex waveforms,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 55, 84–90. Google ScholarScitation
  35. 35. Houtsma, A. J. (1995). “Pitch Perception,” in Hearing, edited by B. C. J. Moore (Academic, Orlando), pp. 267–298. Google Scholar
  36. 36. Huggins, A. W. F.(1974). “On perceptual integration of dichotically alternated pulse trains,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 56, 939–943. Google ScholarScitation
  37. 37. Kaernbach, C., and Demany, L.(1998). “Psychophysical evidence against the autocorrelation theory of auditory temporal processing,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 2298–2306. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  38. 38. Koehnke, J., Culotta, C. P., Hawley, M. L., and Colburn, H. S.(1995). “Effects of reference interaural time and intensity differences on binaural performance in listeners with normal and impaired hearing,” Ear Hear. 16, 331–353. Google ScholarCrossref
  39. 39. Krumbholz, K., Patterson, R. D., and Pressnitzer, D.(2000). “The lower limit of pitch as determined by rate discrimination,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108, 1170–1180. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  40. 40. Kubovy, M.(1988). “Should we resist the seductiveness of the space:time∷vision:audition analogy?” J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 14, 318–320. Google ScholarCrossref
  41. 41. Kuhn, G. F. (1987). “Physical acoustics and measurements pertaining to directional hearing,” in Directional Hearing, edited by W. A. Yost and G. Gourevitch (Springer, New York), pp. 3–25. Google Scholar
  42. 42. Lyzenga, J., and Carlyon, R. P.(2000). “Binaural effects in frequency modulation detection interference for vowel formants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108, 753–759. Google ScholarScitation
  43. 43. McFadden, D., and Pasanen, E. G.(1976). “Lateralization at high frequencies based on interaural time differences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 59, 634–639. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  44. 44. McKay, C. M., and Carlyon, R. P.(1999). “Dual temporal pitch percepts from acoustic and electric amplitude-modulated pulse trains,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 347–357. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  45. 45. Mossop, J. E., and Culling, J. F.(1998). “Lateralization of large interaural delays,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 1574–1579. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  46. 46. Nakao, M. A., and Axelrod, S.(1976). “Effects of bilateral alternation on perceived temporal uniformity of auditory and somasthetic pulse trains,” Percept. Psychophys. 20, 274–280. Google ScholarCrossref
  47. 47. Plack, C. J., and Carlyon, R. P.(1995). “Differences in frequency modulation detection and fundamental frequency discrimination between complex tones consisting of resolved and unresolved harmonics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98, 1355–1364. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  48. 48. Pressnitzer, D., Patterson, R. D., and Krumbholz, K.(1999). “The lower limit of melodic pitch with filtered harmonic complexes,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 1152. Google ScholarScitation
  49. 49. Ritsma, R. J.(1963). “On pitch discrimination of residue tones,” Int. Audiol. 2, 34–37. Google ScholarCrossref, ISI
  50. 50. Rogers, W. L., and Bregman, A. S.(1993). “An experimental evaluation of three theories of stream segregation,” Percept. Psychophys. 53, 179–189. Google ScholarCrossref
  51. 51. Saberi, K.(1996). “Observer weighting of interaural delay in filtered impulses,” Percept. Psychophys. 58, 1037–1046. Google ScholarCrossref
  52. 52. Shackleton, T. M., and Carlyon, R. P.(1994). “The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 3529–3540. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  53. 53. Terhardt, E.(1977). “Pitch shift of monaural pure tones caused by contralateral sounds,” Acustica 37, 56–57. Google Scholar
  54. 54. Thurlow, W. R.(1943). “Studies in auditory theory. I. Binaural interaction and the perception of pitch,” J. Exp. Psychol. 32, 17–36. Google ScholarCrossref
  55. 55. Treisman, A.(1998). “Feature binding, attention, and object perception,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 353, 1265–1306. Google ScholarCrossref
  56. 56. Warren, R. M., and Bashford, J. A.(1976). “Auditory contralateral induction: An early stage in binaural processing,” Percept. Psychophys. 20, 380–386. Google ScholarCrossref
  57. 57. Wiegrebe, L., and Patterson, R. D.(1999). “Quantifying the distortion products generated by SAM noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 2709–2718. Google ScholarScitation
  58. 58. Wightman, F. L., and Kistler, D. J.(1989). “The dominant role of low-frequency interaural time differences in sound localization,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 1648–1661. Google ScholarScitation
  59. 59. Yost, W. A.(1981). “Lateralization position of sinusoids presented with interaural intensive and temporal differences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 70, 397–409. Google ScholarScitation
  60. 60. Yost, W. A., Wightman, F. L., and Green, D. M.(1971). “Lateralization of filtered clicks,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 50, 1526–1531. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  61. 61. Yund, E. W., and Efron, R.(1975). “Dichotic competition of simultaneous tones bursts of different frequency—II. Suppression and ear dominance functions,” Neuropsychologia 13, 137–150. Google ScholarCrossref
  62. 62. Zwicker, E., Flottorp, G., and Stevens, S. S.(1957). “Critical bandwidths in loudness summation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 29, 548–557. Google ScholarScitation
  63. 63. Zwicker, T.(1984). “Experimente zur dichotischen Oktav-Tauschung,” Acustica 55, 128–136. Google Scholar
  1. © 2001 Acoustical Society of America.