Abstract
Continuous magnitude estimation and continuous cross-modality matching with line length can efficiently track the momentary loudness of time-varying sounds in behavioural experiments. These methods are known to be prone to systematic biases but may be checked for consistency using their counterpart, magnitude production. Thus, in Experiment 1, we performed such an evaluation for time-varying sounds. Twenty participants produced continuous cross-modality matches to assess the momentary loudness of fourteen songs by continuously adjusting the length of a line. In Experiment 2, the resulting temporal line length profile for each excerpt was played back like a video together with the given song and participants were asked to continuously adjust the volume to match the momentary line length. The recorded temporal line length profile, however, was manipulated for segments with durations between 7 to 12 s by eight factors between 0.5 and 2, corresponding to expected differences in adjusted level of −10, −6, −3, −1, 1, 3, 6, and 10 dB according to Stevens’s power law for loudness. The average adjustments 5 s after the onset of the change were −3.3, −2.4, −1.0, −0.2, 0.2, 1.4, 2.4, and 4.4 dB. Smaller adjustments than predicted by the power law are in line with magnitude-production results by Stevens and co-workers due to “regression effects.” Continuous cross-modality matches of line length turned out to be consistent with current loudness models, and by passing the consistency check with cross-modal productions, demonstrate that the method is suited to track the momentary loudness of time-varying sounds.
Highlights
There are numerous methods for the subjective evaluation of auditory stimuli for a variety of purposes
Before comparing the cross-modality matching results of Experiment 1 to calculated loudness, we look at the magnitude productions made in Experiment 2
Experiment 1 was analysed to compare the line lengths produced via cross-modality matching with loudness calculations based
Summary
There are numerous methods for the subjective evaluation of auditory stimuli for a variety of purposes. The question is typically “Which of the two sounds was louder?,” and the level of the target stimulus is adjusted before the presentation of the pair Disadvantages of this method are that it needs a reference, that it can only be applied to measure thresholds or points of subjective equality, and that it is time-consuming because determining a point of subjective equality requires several trials. To evaluate the consistency of continuous judgment, in Experiment 1, we had participants make continuous cross-modality matches of line length in response to temporally varying loudness patterns of musical songs. In contrast to Kuwano and Namba (1985), we did not use temporal windows with hard cutoffs but varied the exponential time constant in a loudness model (Moore et al, 2018) to find the highest correlation with the momentary line length matches and to evaluate the choice made by the loudness model
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
