Comparisons of training techniques for complex sound identification.

Abstract

Fourteen different synthetic engine sounds were mixed with five different synthetic cavitation sounds at realistically difficult signal-to noise ratios. Eighty one Royal Navy ratings, divided into eight training groups, were asked to identify the 14 engine sounds. Training procedures were varied among groups to answer some questions pertinent for programming a teaching machine. It was found that (1) verbal descriptions of the actual physical characteristics of the sounds give better results than those supplied by experienced listeners, (2) the order in which training items are presented is important. The most useful order involved changing one relevant quality per item, (3) “good” high engine-to-cavitation ratio) recordings may be an advantage if alternated with realistically “bad” ones, (4) feedback (knowledge-of-results) procedures should be concentrated more at the end of a training program and recordings should be extended temporally to overlap with the feedback, (5) a large population of engine noises is desirable for but probably not essential to, a good program.