Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 305–313 | Cite as

Effect and artifact in the auditory discrimination of rise and decay time: Speech and nonspeech

  • Marcel P. R. Van Den Broecke
  • Vincent J. Van Heuven


The just noticeable difference (JND) for abruptness so far has not been studied in speech-like signals, and earlier studies have confounded decay time and overall signal duration. We therefore established JND for rise and decay time in a 10–80-msec range in a series of experiments involving an adjustment method using various speech and nonspeech signal types. Decay time did or did not vary independently of duration. Results showed that JND is in the order of 25%–30% of the reference value, with no essential difference between rise- and decay-time discrimination if these parameters are varied independently of duration. Decay-time discrimination turned out to be more accurate for wide-band signal types (noise) in the upper part of the stimulus range than it did for narrow-band signals (tones and complex harmonic signals). The data suggest that rise- and decay-time discrimination is too poor to reliably cue more than two categories in spite of the wide range of values found in speech sounds.

Reference Notes

  1. 1.
    MacMillan, N. Personal communication, 1982.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van Heuven, V. J. J. P., & van den Broecke, M. P. R.Auditory discrimination of rise and decay times in various speech and nonspeech sounds (Progress Report of the Institute of Phonetics 5.1). Utrecht: Utrecht University, 1980.Google Scholar


  1. Cardozo, B. L. Adjusting the method of adjustment: SD vs SL.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1965,37,786–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Catford, J. C.Fundamental problems in phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, A., Slis, I. H., &’T Hart, J. Perceptual tolerances of isolated Dutch vowels.Phonetica, 1963,9, 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cutting, J. E., &Rosner, B. S. Categories and boundaries in speech and music.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,16, 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Debrock, M. An acoustic correlate of the force of articulation.Journal of Phonetics, 1977,5, 61–80.Google Scholar
  6. Diehl, R. Feature analyzers for the phonetic dimension stop vs. continuant.Perception & Psychophysics, 1976,19, 267–272.Google Scholar
  7. Gerstman, L. J.Perceptual dimensions for the friction portions of certain speech sounds. Unpublished PhD thesis, New York University, 1957.Google Scholar
  8. Jakobson, R., Fant, G., &Halle, M.Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  9. Kat, D., &Samuel, A. G. More adaptation of speech by nonspeech.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1980,68, S10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kunisaki, O., Higuchi, N., &Fujusakl H. Extraction of acoustic features and the classification of the voiceless affricates /ts/ and /ch/ in Japanese.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1978,64, S179–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lehto, L. English stress and its modification by intonation: An analytic and synthetic study of acoustic parameters.Helsinki:Soumalainen Tiedeakaternia, 1969.Google Scholar
  12. Liljencrants, J. The Ove III speech synthesizer.IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, 1968,AU-16, 137–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Malécot, A. The glottal stop in French.Phonetica, 1975,31, 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller, G. A. The perception of short bursts of noise.Journal of the Acoustical Society of A merica, 1948,20, 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Plomp, R. Rate of decay of auditory sensation.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1964,36, 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pols, L. C. W., Plomp, R., Tromp, H. Frequency analysis of Dutch vowels from 50 male speakers.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1973,53, 1093–1101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Postal, P.Aspects of phonological theory. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.Google Scholar
  18. Rakowski, A. Pitch discrimination at the threshold of hearing. InProceedings of the Seventh International Congress on Acoustics, Budapest. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado, 1971.Google Scholar
  19. Remez, R., Cutting, J., &Studdert-Kennedy, M. Cross series adaptation using song and string.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,27, 524–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosen, M., &Howell, P. Plucks and bows are not categorically perceived.Perception & Psychophysics, 1981,30, 156–168.Google Scholar
  21. Sabine, W. C.Collected papers on acoustics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1923.Google Scholar
  22. Samuel, A., &Newport, E. Adaptation of speech by nonspeech: Evidence for complex acoustic cue detectors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1979,5, 563–578.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Schuster, K., &Waetzmann, E. Über den Nachhall in geschlossenen Raumen.Annalen der Physik, 1929,5, 671–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stevens, K. N. Acoustic correlates of some phonetic categories.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1980,68, 836–842.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. van Heuven, V. J. The relative contribution of rise time, steady time, and overall duration of noise bursts to the affricate-fricative distinction in English: A re-analysis of old data. In J. J. Wolf & D. H. Klatt (Eds.),ASA 50 speech communication papers. New York: The Acoustical Society of America, 1979.Google Scholar
  26. van Heuven, V. J. J. P., &van den Broecke, M. P. R. Perceptual discrimination of rise and decay times in tone and noise bursts.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1979,66, 1308–1315.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. von Békésy, G. Über die Hörsamkeit der Ein- und Ausschwingvorgänge mit Berucksichtigung der Raumakustik.Annalen der Physik, 1933,16, 844–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. von Békésy, G.Experiments in hearing. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcel P. R. Van Den Broecke
    • 1
  • Vincent J. Van Heuven
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of PhoneticsUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Leyden UmversityLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations