Abstract
The purpose of the current study was to test sound localization of a spoken word, rarely studied in the context of localization, compared to pink noise and a gunshot, while taking into account the source position and the effect of different hearing protection devices (HPDs) used by the listener. Ninety participants were divided into three groups using different HPDs. Participants were tested twice, under with- and no-HPD conditions, and were requested to localize the different stimuli that were delivered from one of eight speakers evenly distributed around them (starting from 22.5°). Localization of the word stimulus was more difficult than that of the other stimuli. HPD usage resulted in a larger mean root-mean-square error (RMSE) and increased mirror image reversal errors for all stimuli. In addition, HPD usage increased the mean RMSE and mirror image reversal errors for stimuli delivered from the front and back, more than for stimuli delivered from the left and right. HPDs affect localization, both due to attenuation and to limitation of pinnae cues when using earmuffs. Difficulty localizing the spoken word should be considered when assessing auditory functionality and should be further investigated to include HPDs with different attenuation spectra and levels, and to further types of speech stimuli.
Highlights
The ability to localize sound is important for survival, originating from the need to identify potential risks in the environment, whether a stalking predator or an approaching car when crossing a street
We focused on acoustic stimuli presented in the horizontal plane, referring to horizontal positions in reference to the forehead of a listener who is seated in the center and surrounded by equidistant sound sources
No difference in root-mean-square error (RMSE) was found between hearing protection devices (HPDs) groups under differed between all three stimuli, withp the word having largest and thedifgunshot the no-HPD
Summary
The ability to localize sound is important for survival, originating from the need to identify potential risks in the environment, whether a stalking predator or an approaching car when crossing a street. Confusing a right-delivered stimulus for a left one, or vice versa (termed here as right/left or left/right errors), reflects a difficulty in perceiving cues related to interaural differences. Confusing a front-delivered stimulus for a back one, or vice versa (termed here as front/back or back/front errors), reflects a difficulty in perceiving spectral cues, related to changes in the sound’s spectra due to the pinnae, head, and torso [5,6]. The localization can be evaluated either by specifying the sound source azimuth in units of degrees, or by a binary generalization of the sound source hemifield The latter reflects whether a stimulus originating from one of the hemifields would be perceived correctly or incorrectly as originating from the opposite hemifield
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
