Abstract
To comprehend speech in most environments, listeners must combine some but not all sounds from across a wide range of frequencies. Three experiments were conducted to examine the role of amplitude comodulation in performing an essential part of this function: the grouping together of the simultaneous components of a speech signal. Each of the experiments used time-varying sinusoidal (TVS) sentences (Remez, Rubin, Pisoni, & Carrell, 1981) as base stimuli because their component tones are acoustically unrelated. The independence of the three tones reduced the number of confounding grouping cues available compared with those found in natural or computersynthesized speech (e.g., fundamental frequency and simultaneity of harmonic onset). In each of the experiments, the TVS base stimuli were amplitude modulated to determine whether this modulation would lead to appropriate grouping of the three tones as reflected by sentence intelligibility. Experiment 1 demonstrated that amplitude comodulation at 100 Hz did improve the intelligibility of TVS sentences. Experiment 2 showed that the component tones of a TVS sentence must be comodulated (as opposed to independently modulated) for improvements in intelligibility to be found. Experiment 3 showed that the comodulation rates that led to intelligibility improvements were consistent with the effective rates found in experiments that examined the grouping of complex nonspeech sounds by common temporal envelopes(e.g., comodulation masking release; Hall, Haggard, & Fernandes, 1984). The results of these experiments support the claim that certain basic temporal-envelope processing capabilities of the liunian auditory system contribute to the perception of fluent speech.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Barr, C. T., Studdert-Kennedy, M., Manuel, S., &Ruamj-Sprrz, J. (1989). Discovering phonetic coherence in acoustic patterns.Perception & Psychophysics,45, 237–250.
Bregman, A. S. (1990).Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bregman, A. S., Abramson, J., Doehring, P., &Darwin, C. J. (1985). Spectral integration based on common amplitude modulation.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 483–493.
Buus, S. (1985). Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,78, 1958–1965.
Carrell, T. D. (1990). The effect of amplitude modulation on the intelligibility of sentences in noise.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,88, S174.
Cohen, M. F., &Schubert, E.D. (1987). The effect of cross-spectrum correlation on the detectability of a noise band.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,81, 721–723.
Darwin, C. J. (1981). Perceptualgrouping of speech components differing in fundamental frequency and onset-time.Quarterly Journal of Esperimental Psychology,33A, 185–208.
Darwin, C. J. (1984). Perceiving vowels in the presence of another sound: Constraints on formant perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,76, 1636–1647.
Egan, J. P. (1948). Articulation testing methods.Laryngoscope,58, 955–991.
Gardner, R. B., Gaskill, S. A., &Darwin, C. J. (1989). Perceptual grouping of formants with static and dynamic differences in fundamental frequency.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,85, 1329–1337.
Goldstein, J. L. (1973). An optimum processor theory for the central information of the pitch of complex tones.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,54, 1496–1516.
Grose, J. H., &Hall, J. W. (1992). Comodulation masking release for speech stimuli.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,91, 1042–1052.
Grosjean, F. (1980). Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 267–283.
Hall, J. W. (1987). Experiments on comodulation masking release. In W. A. Yost & C. S. Watson (Eds.),Auditory processing of complex sounds (pp. 57–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hall, J. W., &Haggard, M. P. (1983). Co-modulation: A principle for auditory pattern analysis in speech.Proceedings of the 11th International Congress on Acoustics,4, 69–71.
Hall, J. W., Haggard, M. P., &Fernandes, M. A. (1984). Detection in noise by spectro-temporal pattern analysis.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,76, 50–56.
Keppel, G. (1973).Design and analysis:A researcher’s handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kewley-Port, D. (1976).A complex-tone generating program. Research on Speech Perception Progress Rep. No. 3. Bloomington: Indiana University, Department of Psychology, Speech Research Laboratory.
McAdams, S. (1984). The auditory image:A metaphor for musical and psychological research on auditory organization. In W. R. Crozier & A. J. Chapman (Eds.),Cognitive processes in the perception of art (pp. 289–323). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
McFadden, D. M. (1987). Comodulation detection differences using noise-band signals.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,81, 15, 19–1527.
McGuse, H., &Macdonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices.Nature,254, 746–748.
Miller, G. A., Heise, G. A., &Lichten, W. (1951). The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials.Journal of ExperimentalPsychology,41, 329–335.
Moose, B. C. J. (1989).Anintroduction to thepsychology of hearing. London: Academic Press.
Moose, B. C. J. (1990). Co-modulation masking release: Spectrotemporal pattern analysis in hearing.British Journal of Audiology,24, 131–137.
Peterson, G. E., &Barney, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in a study of the vowels.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,24, 175–184.
Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., &Careell, T. D. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues.Science,212, 947–950.
Remez, R. E., &Rubin, P. E. (1990). On the perception of speech from time-varying acoustic information: Contributions of amplitude variation.Perception & Psychophysics,48, 313–325.
Scheffers, M. T. M. (1983).Sifting vowels: Auditory pitch analysis and sound segregation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Groningen University, The Netherlands.
Schooneveldt, G. P., &Moose, B. C. 3. (1987). Comodulation masking release as a function of signal frequency, flanking band frequency, masker bandwidth, and flanking band level.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,82, 1944–1956.
Summerfield, Q. (1979). Use of visual information for phonetic perception.Phonetica,36, 314–331.
Wright, B. A. (1990). Comodulation detection differences with multiple signal bands.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,87, 292–303.
Wright, B. A., &McFadden, D. (1990). Uncertainty about the correlation amongtemporal envelopes in two comodulation tasks.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,88, 1339–1350.
Yost, W., &Sheft, S. (1989). Across critical band processing of amplitude modulated tones.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,85, 848–857.
Yost, W. A., Sheft, S., &Opie, J. M. (1989). Modulation interference in detection and discrimination of amplitude modulation.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,86, 2138–2147.
Zwicker, U. T. (1984). Auditory recognition of diotic and dichotic vowel pairs.Speech Communication,3, 265–277.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Preparation of this articlewas supported in part by Northwestern University URGC Awards O3XE and O5XF to T.D.C. Portions of this work were presented to the 116th and 118th meetings of the Acoustical Society of America.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carrell, T.D., Opie, J.M. The effect of amplitude comodulation on auditory object formation in sentence perception. Perception & Psychophysics 52, 437–445 (1992). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206703
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206703