Auditory Object Formation and Selection
- 1.6k Downloads
Most normal-hearing listeners can understand a conversational partner in an everyday setting with an ease that is unmatched by any computational algorithm available today. This ability to reliably extract meaning from a sound source in a mixture of competing sources relies on the fact that natural, meaningful sounds have structure in both time and frequency. Such structure supports two processes that enable humans and animals to solve the cocktail party problem: auditory object formation and auditory object selection. These processes, which are closely intertwined and difficult to isolate, are linked to previous work on auditory scene analysis and auditory attention, respectively. This chapter considers how the brain may implement object formation and object selection. Specifically, the chapter focuses on how different regions of the brain cooperate to isolate the neural representation of sound coming from a source of interest and enhance it while suppressing the responses to distracting or unimportant sounds in a sound mixture.
KeywordsAuditory grouping Auditory streaming Cocktail party Energetic masking Informational masking Scene analysis Selective attention
Compliance with Ethics Requirements
Barbara Shinn-Cunningham has no conflicts of interest.
Virginia Best has no conflicts of interest.
Adrian K. C. Lee has no conflicts of interest.
- Benard, M. R., Mensink, J. S., & Başkent, D. (2014). Individual differences in top-down restoration of interrupted speech: Links to linguistic and cognitive abilities. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 135, EL88–94.Google Scholar
- Bharadwaj, H. M., Lee, A. K. C., & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2014). Measuring auditory selective attention using frequency tagging. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 8, 6.Google Scholar
- Bregman, A. S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis: The perceptual organization of sound. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Broadbent, D. E. (1956). Successive responses to simultaneous stimuli. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 145–152.Google Scholar
- Darwin, C. J., Hukin, R. W., & al-Khatib, B. Y. (1995). Grouping in pitch perception: Evidence for sequential constraints. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98(2 Pt 1), 880–885.Google Scholar
- Devergie, A., Grimault, N., Tillmann, B., & Berthommier, F. (2010). Effect of rhythmic attention on the segregation of interleaved melodies. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(1), EL1–7.Google Scholar
- Hupe, J. M., Joffo, L. M., & Pressnitzer, D. (2008). Bistability for audiovisual stimuli: Perceptual decision is modality specific. Journal of Vision, 8(7), 11–15.Google Scholar
- Kaya, E. M., & Elhilali, M. (2014). Investigating bottom-up auditory attention. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(327), 1–12.Google Scholar
- Kidd, G., Mason, C. R., Brughera, A., & Hartmann, W. M. (2005b). The role of reverberation in release from masking due to spatial separation of sources for speech identification. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 91(3), 526–536.Google Scholar
- Kidd, G., Jr., Mason, C. R., Richards, V. M., Gallun, F. J., & Durlach, N. I. (2008). Informational Masking. In W. Yost, A. Popper, & R. Fay (Eds.), Auditory perception of sound sources (pp. 143–189). New York: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
- Larson, E., & Lee, A. K. C. (2013). Influence of preparation time and pitch separation in switching of auditory attention between streams. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134(2), EL165–171.Google Scholar
- Lee, A. K. C., Rajaram, S., Xia, J., Bharadwaj, H., et al. (2013). Auditory selective attention reveals preparatory activity in different cortical regions for selection based on source location and source pitch. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 6, 190.Google Scholar
- Maddox, R. K., Atilgan, H., Bizley, J. K., & Lee, A. K. (2015). Auditory selective attention is enhanced by a task-irrelevant temporally coherent visual stimulus in human listeners. Elife, 4. doi: 10.7554/eLife.04995
- Marrocco, R. T., & Davidson, M. C. (1998). Neurochemistry of attention. In R. Parasuraman (Ed.), The attentive brain (Vol. xii, pp. 35–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Noyce, A. L., Cestero, N., Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., & Somers, D. C. (2016). Short-term memory stores organized by information domain. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(30), 960–970.Google Scholar
- Plack, C. J., Barker, D., & Prendergast, G. (2014). Perceptual consequences of “hidden” hearing loss. Trends in Hearing, 18. doi: 10.1177/2331216514550621
- Ruggles, D., Bharadwaj, H., & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2011). Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 108(37), 15516–15521.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Shuai, L., & Elhilali, M. (2014). Task-dependent neural representations of salient events in dynamic auditory scenes. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8(203), 1–11.Google Scholar
- Ungerleider, L. G., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. J. Ingle, M. A. Goodale, & R. J. W. Mansfield (Eds.), Analysis of visual behaviour (pp. 549–586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- von Békésy, G. (1960). Experiments in hearing (1989th ed.). New York: Acoustical Society of America Press.Google Scholar
- Woldorff, M. G., Gallen, C. C., Hampson, S. A., Hillyard, S. A., et al. (1993). Modulation of early sensory processing in human auditory-cortex during auditory selective attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 90(18), 8722–8726.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar