Abstract
Discriminably different sounds, concurrently presented from the left and right of the medial plane, were reduced in angular separation until subjects could no longer detect which sound was “left” and which was “right.” The procedure was repeated with hearing masked and judgments made on the basis of the tactile signals at two fingertip vibrators that received their inputs from two miniature microphones bilaterally located on the subject’s head. Auditory and tactile performance were compared under active (head movements permitted) and passive (head held still) conditions. Active and passive performance were not significantly different. Auditory and tactile performance became no better than chance at angular separations of 2.7° and 4.4°, respectively. Touch compared sufficiently well with audition to support arguments for the inclusion of sound localization information in devices which use the skin as a substitute for the ear. nt]mis|This research was conducted at the Smith-Kettlewell Institute of Visual Sciences, San Francisco, California. This institute provided the apparatus for the experiment. B. L. Richardson was on Staff Development Leave from the Applied Psychology Department of the Caulfield Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References Notes
Binns, P. T.“The Kamplex” tactile artificial ear and its use with the deaf-blind. Report from Perkins School, Watertown, New York, 19688.
Saunders, F. A., Hill, W. A., & Simpson, C. A.Hearing substitution: A wearable electrotactile vocoder for the deaf. Unpublished manuscript, Smith Kettlewell Institute for Visual Sciences, San Francisco, 1976.
References
Broadbent, D. E.Perception and communication. New York: Pergamon, 1958.
Egan, J. P., Carterette, E. C., &Thwing, E. J. Some factors affecting multi-channel listening.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1954,3, 774–782.
Ffreedman, S. J., &Fisher, H. G. The role of the pinna in auditory localization. In S. J. Freedman (Ed.),The neuropsychology of spatially oriented behavior. Homewood, Ill. Dorey, 1968.
Frost, B. J., &Richardson, B. L. Tactile localization of sounds: Acuity, tracking moving sources, and selective attention.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1976,59, 907–914.
Gault, R. H. Progress in experiments on tactual interpretation of oral speech.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1924,19, 135–159.
Gescheider, G. A. Cutaneous sound localization.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965,70, 617–625.
Gescheider, G. A. Some comparisons between touch and hearing.IEEE Transactions on Man-Machine Systems, 1970, MMS-11, 28–35.
Mills, A. W. Auditory localization. In J. V. Tobias (Ed.),Foundation of modern auditory theory, New York: Academic Press, 1972.
Neisser, U.Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
Pickett, J. M., &Pickett, B. M. Communication of speech sounds by a tactual vocoder.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1963,6, 207–222.
Spieth, W., Curtis, J. F., &Webster, J. C. Responding to one of two simultaneous messages.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1954,26, 391–396.
Treisman, A. M. Contextual cues in selective listening.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960,12, 242–248.
Wallach, H. On sound localization.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1939,10, 270–274.
Wallach, H. The role of head movements and vestibular and visual cues in sound localization.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1940,27, 339–368.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Richardson, B.L., Wuillemin, D.B. & Saunders, F.J. Tactile discrimination of competing sounds. Perception & Psychophysics 24, 546–550 (1978). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198782
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198782