Abstract
The influence of intensity range in auditory identification and intensity discrimination experiments is well documented and is usually attributed to nonsensory factors. Recent studies, however, have suggested that the stimulus range effect might be sensory in origin. To test this notion, in one set of experiments, we had listeners identify the individual tones in a set. One baseline condition consisted of identifying four 1-kHz, low-intensity tones; the other consisted of identifying four 1-kHz, high-intensity tones. In the experimental conditions, these baseline tone sets were augmented by adding a fifth tone at either 1 or 5 kHz. Added 5-kHz tones had little effect on identification accuracy for the four baseline tones. When an added 1-kHz tone differed substantially in intensity from the four baseline tones, it adversely affected performance, with the addition of a high-intensity tone to a set of low-intensity tones having a more deleterious effect than the addition of a low-intensity tone to a set of high-intensity tones. These and further results, obtained in an exploration of this asymmetrical range effect in a third identification experiment and in two intensity-discrimination experiments, were consistent with the notion of a nonlinear amplifier under top-down control whose functions include protection against sensory overload from loud sounds. The identification data were well described by a signal-detection model using equal-variance Laplace distributions instead of the usual Gaussian distributions.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berliner, J. E., &Durlach, N. I. (1973). Intensity perception. IV. Resolution in roving level discrimination.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,53, 1270–1287.
Braida, L. D., &Durlach, N. I. (1972). Intensity perception: II. Resolution in one-interval paradigms.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,51, 483–502.
Dulon, D., & Schacht, J. (1992). Motility of cochlear outer hair cells.American Journal of Otolaryngology,13, 108–112.
Durlach, N. I., &Braida, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception: I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,46, 372–383.
Eijkman, E., Thijssen, J. M., &Vendrik, A. J. H. (1966). Weber's law, power law, and internal noise.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,40, 1164–1173.
Evans, M., Hastings, N., &Peacock, B. (1993).Statistical distributions 2/e. New York: Wiley.
Gravetter, F., &Lockhead, G. R. (1973). Criterial range as a frame of reference for stimulus judgment.Psychological Review,80, 203–216.
Hulshoff Pol, H. E., Hijman, R., Baaré, W. F. C., &van Ree, J. M. (1998). Effects of context on judgements of odor intensities in humans.Chemical Senses,23, 131–135.
Jesteadt, W., Wier, C. C., &Green, D. M. (1977). Intensity discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,61, 169–177.
Liberman, M. C., &Guinan, J. J. (1998). Feedback control of the auditory periphery: Anti-masking effects of middle ear muscles vs. olivocochlear efferents.Journal of Communication Disorders,31, 471–483.
Mapes-Riordan, D., &Yost, W. A. (1999). Loudness recalibration as a function of level.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,106, 3506–3511.
Marks, L. E. (1979). A theory of loudness and loudness judgments.Psychological Review,86, 256–285.
Marks, L. E. (1988). Magnitude estimation and sensory matching.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 511–525.
Marks, L. E. (1992). The contingency of perceptual processing: Context modifies equal-loudness relations.Psychological Science,3, 285–291.
Marks, L. E. (1994). “Recalibrating” the auditory system: The perception of loudness.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 382–396.
Marks, L. E., Szczesiul, R., &Ohlott, P. (1986). On the cross-modal perception of intensity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 517–534.
Marks, L. E., &Warner, E. (1991). Slippery context effect and critical bands.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 986–996.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1983). Shifts of attention in the identification and discrimination of intensity.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 103–112.
Ohzawa, I., Sclar, G., &Freeman, R. D. (1982). Contrast gain control in the cat visual cortex.Nature,298, 266–268.
Parker, S., &Schneider, B. (1980). Loudness and loudness discrimination.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 398–406.
Parker, S., &Schneider, B. (1994). The stimulus range effect: Evidence for top-down control of sensory intensity in audition.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 1–11.
Pollack, I. (1952). The information of elementary auditory displays.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,24, 745–749.
Poulton, E. C. (1968). The new psychophysics: Six models for magnitude estimation.Psychological Bulletin,69, 1–19.
Robinson, D. W., &Dadson, R. S. (1956). A redetermination of the equalloudness relations for pure tones.British Journal of Applied Physics,7, 166–181.
Scharf, B., Magnan, J., &Chays, A. (1997). On the role of the olivocochlear bundle in hearing: 16 case studies.Hearing Research,103, 101–122.
Schneider, B., &Parker, S. (1990). Does stimulus context affect loudness or only loudness judgments?Perception & Psychophysics,48, 409–418.
Schneider, B., Parker, S., &Moraglia, G. (1996). The effect of stimulus range on perceived contrast: Evidence for contrast gain control.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,50, 347–355.
Stevens, S. S. (1971). Issues in psychophysical measurement.Psychological Review,78, 426–450.
Teghtsoonian, R. (1973). Range effects in psychophysical scaling and a revision of Stevens' law.American Journal of Psychology,86, 3–27.
Wilson, H. R., &Humanski, R. (1993). Spatial frequency adaptation and contrast gain control.Vision Research,33, 1133–1149.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant 9952-98 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parker, S., Murphy, D.R. & Schneider, B.A. Top-down gain control in the auditory system: Evidence from identification and discrimination experiments. Perception & Psychophysics 64, 598–615 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194729
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194729