Effect of flanking sounds on the auditory continuity illusion.

Maori Kobayashi, Makio Kashino
Author Information
  1. Maori Kobayashi: Department of Science and Technology, Meiji University, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, Japan. te11001@meiji.ac.jp

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The auditory continuity illusion or the perceptual restoration of a target sound briefly interrupted by an extraneous sound has been shown to depend on masking. However, little is known about factors other than masking.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We examined whether a sequence of flanking transient sounds affects the apparent continuity of a target tone alternated with a bandpass noise at regular intervals. The flanking sounds significantly increased the limit of perceiving apparent continuity in terms of the maximum target level at a fixed noise level, irrespective of the frequency separation between the target and flanking sounds: the flanking sounds enhanced the continuity illusion. This effect was dependent on the temporal relationship between the flanking sounds and noise bursts.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The spectrotemporal characteristics of the enhancement effect suggest that a mechanism to compensate for exogenous attentional distraction may contribute to the continuity illusion.

References

  1. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Oct;23(10):2675-89 [PMID: 21268669]
  2. Neuron. 2007 Apr 5;54(1):153-65 [PMID: 17408584]
  3. Neuroreport. 2001 Jan 22;12(1):7-10 [PMID: 11201094]
  4. J Acoust Soc Am. 1972 Jun;51(6):1885-94 [PMID: 4339849]
  5. J Cogn Neurosci. 2003 Jul 1;15(5):747-58 [PMID: 12965047]
  6. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993 Dec;94(6):3112-26 [PMID: 8300950]
  7. Percept Psychophys. 2008 Jan;70(1):1-12 [PMID: 18306956]
  8. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Jun;113(6):2984-7 [PMID: 12822768]
  9. Psychophysiology. 2006 Mar;43(2):172-9 [PMID: 16712587]
  10. Percept Psychophys. 2007 Apr;69(3):393-9 [PMID: 17672427]
  11. Science. 1972 Jun 9;176(4039):1149-51 [PMID: 5035477]
  12. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999 Dec;106(6):3529-38 [PMID: 10615693]
  13. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998 Jul;24(4):979-92 [PMID: 9699304]
  14. Can J Exp Psychol. 1994 Jun;48(2):182-204 [PMID: 8069281]
  15. Percept Psychophys. 2004 Oct;66(7):1147-61 [PMID: 15751472]
  16. Perception. 1998;27(9):1041-54 [PMID: 10341934]
  17. Percept Psychophys. 1996 Aug;58(6):899-905 [PMID: 8768184]
  18. Percept Psychophys. 2005 Apr;67(3):531-44 [PMID: 16119399]
  19. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007 Aug;17(4):437-55 [PMID: 17714933]
  20. Nat Neurosci. 2004 Jul;7(7):773-8 [PMID: 15195098]
  21. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987 Apr;81(4):1073-7 [PMID: 3571723]
  22. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1992 Aug;18(3):849-60 [PMID: 1500880]

MeSH Term

Acoustic Stimulation
Adult
Attention
Auditory Cortex
Humans
Illusions
Noise
Sound
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0continuityflankingsoundsillusiontargetnoiseauditorysoundmaskingapparentleveleffectBACKGROUND:perceptualrestorationbrieflyinterruptedextraneousshowndependHoweverlittleknownfactorsMETHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALFINDINGS:examinedwhethersequencetransientaffectstonealternatedbandpassregularintervalssignificantlyincreasedlimitperceivingtermsmaximumfixedirrespectivefrequencyseparationsounds:enhanceddependenttemporalrelationshipburstsCONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:spectrotemporalcharacteristicsenhancementsuggestmechanismcompensateexogenousattentionaldistractionmaycontributeEffect

Similar Articles

Cited By