Abstract
Listeners identified both constituents ofdouble vowels created by summing the waveforms of pairs of synthetic vowels with the same duration and fundamental frequency, Accuracy of identification was significantly above chance. Effects of introducing such double vowels by visual or acoustical precursor stimuli were examined. Precursors specified the identity of one of the two constituent vowels. Performance was scored as the accuracy with which the other vowel was identified. Visual precursors were standard English spellings of one member of the vowel pair; acoustical precursors were 1-sec segments of one member of the vowel pair. Neither visual precursors nor contralateral acoustical precursors improved performance over the condition with no precursor. Thus, knowledge of the identity of one of the constituents of a double vowel does not help listeners to identify the other constituent. A significant improvement in performance did occur with ipsilateral acoustical precursors, consistent with earlier demonstrations that frequency components which undergo changes in spectral amplitude achieve enhanced auditory prominence relative to unchanging components. This outcome demonstrates the joint but independent operation of auditory and perceptual processes underlying the ability of listeners to understand speech despite adversely peaked frequency responses in communication channels.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
ANSI (1969).American national standards for audiometers (ANSI S3.6–1969). New York: American National Standards Institute.
Assmann, P. F., &Summerfleld, A. Q. (1989). Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: Vowels with the same fundamental frequency.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,85, 327–338.
Cardozo, B. L. (1967).Ohm’s Law and masking (IPO Annual Progress Report No.2, pp. 59–64). Eindhoven, The Netherlands: Institute for Perception Research.
Carlson, R., Granstrom, B., &Klatt, D. H. (1979).Vowel perception: The relative perceptual salience of selected acoustic manipulations (Quarterly Progress Report on Speech Research, STL-QPSR 3-4/1979, pp. 73–83). Stockholm, Sweden: Speech Transmission Laboratory, Royal Institute of Technology.
Darwin, C. J. (1984a). Auditory processing and speech perception. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 197–209). London: Erlbaum.
Darwin, C. L. (1984b). Perceiving vowels in the presence of another sound: Constraints on formant perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,76, 1636–1647.
Darwin, C. J., &Gardner, R. B. (1987). Perceptual separation of speech from concurrent sounds. In M. E. H. Schouten (Ed.),The psychophysics of speech perception (pp. 112–124). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Haggard, M. P. (1974). Selectivity for distortions and words in speech perception.British Journal of Psychology,65, 69–83.
Kaiser, J. F. (1966). Digital filters. In F. F. Kuo & J. F. Kaiser (Eds.),Systems analysis by digital computer (chap. 7). New York: Wiley.
Klatt, D. H. (1980). Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,67, 971–995.
Lim, J. S. (1983).Speech enhancement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Scheffers, M. T. M. (1983).Sifting vowels: Auditory pitch analysis and sound segregation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Smith, R. L. (1979). Adaptation, saturation, and physiological masking in single auditory-nerve fibers.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,65, 166–178.
Smith, R. L., Brachman, M. L., &Frisina, R. D. (1985). Sensitivity of auditory-nerve fibers to changes in intensity: A dichotomy between decrements and increments.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,78, 1310–1316.
Summerfleld, A. Q., &Assmann, P. F. (1987). Auditory enhancement in speech perception. In M. E. H. Schouten (Ed.),The psychophysics of speech perception (pp. 140–150). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Summerfleld, A. Q., Haggard, M. P., Foster, J. R., &Gray, S. (1984). Perceiving vowels from uniform spectra: Phonetic exploration of an auditory aftereffect.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 203–213.
Summerfleld, A. Q., Sidwell, A., &Nelson, A. (1987). Auditory enhancement of changes in spectral amplitude.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,81, 700–708.
Viemeister, N. F. (1980). Adaptation of masking. In G. van den Brink & F. A. Bilsen (Eds.),Psychophysical, physiological, and behavioral studies in hearing (pp. 190–198). Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University Press.
Viemeister, N. F., &Bacon, S. (1982). Forward masking by enhanced components in harmonic complexes.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,71, 1502–1507.
Wilson, J. P. (1970). An auditory after-image. In R. Plomp & G. F. Smoorenburg (Eds.),Frequency analysis and periodicity detection in hearing (pp. 303–315). Leiden, The Netherlands: A. W. Sijthoff.
Winer, B. J. (1971).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Zwicker, U. T. (1984). Auditory recognition of diotic and dichotic vowel pairs.Speech Communication,3, 265–277.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Summerfield, Q., Assmann, P.F. Auditory enhancement and the perception of concurrent vowels. Perception & Psychophysics 45, 529–536 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208060
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208060