Sweep-induced acceleration in loudness change and the “bias for rising intensities”

A pure tone changing continuously in intensity shows sweep-induced fading (SIF) of loudness as intensity sweeps down and may show a lesser degree of sweep-induced enhancement (SIE) as intensity sweeps up (Canévet & Scharf, 1990); the former effect has been calleddecruitment, the latterupcruitment. An opposite effect—upsweeps being judged to show more loudness change than downsweeps—has been reported by Neuhoff (1998). These disparate results might stem from several procedural differences. We found that differences in the sweep’s duration and intensity level did not account for the disparity, nor did the presence of a steady tone preceding the sweep. In a second experiment, direct judgments of sweep size, such as those Neuhoff’s (1998) listeners made, were affected not only by sweep size itself, but also by the intensity at the end of the sweep. The latter effect was especially marked for upsweeps. Neuhoff’s (1998) proposed “bias for rising intensities” was found only with a method for judging sweep size that is more sensitive to end level than to sweep size.     

The perception of waning signals: decruitment in loudness and perceived size

When a tone or broad-band noise sweeps smoothly from a moderate intensity to a low one, the loudness at the end of the sweep is far less than what would be predicted from its intensity. The accelerated reduction in loudness, which was first reported by Canévet (1986) and confirmed in several later reports, has been called loudness decruitment, and has been tentatively interpreted as the result of some form of adaptation. Since both simple and induced adaptation have distinctive temporal profiles, we undertook a series of studies in which we varied the duration of a tone whose intensity was continuously changing, to see whether the effect of duration on decruitment resembled the effects of duration on adaptation. We discovered that the magnitude of decruitment remained unaffected when the duration of the sweep was reduced far below the durations of 90 to 180 sec that have been used in previous studies. The same effect was observed for durations of around 20 sec, but it declined rapidly to a low level at the lowest duration of 1.0 sec. This temporal pattern is strikingly different from what has been reported for either simple or ipsilaterally induced adaptation, which suggests that neither form of adaptation can account for the entire effect. We also wanted to know whether an analogous phenomenon could exist for a sensory modality other than hearing. In the present study, observers were asked to judge the apparent size of a solid disk on a computer monitor, the disk increased or decreased continuously in area, or appeared as a series of separate areas, either in random order or in ordered progressions. We found that, as in the case of loudness, apparent size decreased more rapidly when the areas decreased continuously than would have been predicted from the actual areas themselves. We also found that some part of the accelerated shrinkage was due to a response bias in the observers' judgments that stemmed from knowledge that every value in a continuously changing series is predictably smaller (or larger, for a growing series). Whether the remaining part of the effect is a sensory phenomenon is an important issue for future research.     

Individual loudness functions determined from direct comparisons of loudness intervals

Five subjects were required in each trial to directly compare two pairs of tones and indicate which pair of tones had the greater loudness difference. Ten 1,200-Hz tones differing only in intensity were employed. Subjects made binary comparisons among the 45 tone pairs that can be formed from these 10 tones. The loudness difference comparisons of each subject were found to satisfy two properties (transitivity and monotonicity) that are required for an interval scale representation of loudness. Therefore, individual loudness scales were constructed using a nonmetric scaling technique designed for comparisons of sensory intervals. These loudness scales differed significantly from subject to subject. Since a nonnumerical scaling procedure was employed, these individual differences could not be attributed to biases in the way in which observers use numbers or numerical concepts to describe the loudness of tones. Hence, they suggest strong individual differences in the coding of sound intensity.     

LOUDNESS AS A FUNCTION OF THE DURATION OF AUDITORY STIMULATION

The perceived loudness of a 1000 c/s tone was measured by a direct scaling method under different conditions of intensity (19–35 db) and duration (50–500 msec) of stimulation. It was found that loudness grows as a logarithmic function of stimulus duration; the relation was verified for ten individual subjects and four levels of intensity. In addition, the relation between temporal threshold and level of intensity was tentatively described.     

Time errors and differential sensation weighting

Sixteen pairs of successive tones, with different amplitude combinations, were presented with 16 combinations of tone duration and interstimulus interval. A separate group of 12 subjects was assigned to each presentation condition and made comparative loudness judgments for each of the pairs. Perceived within-pair loudness differences were scaled by a Thurstonian method using the subjective width of the "equal" category as the unit. The scale differences were well described by weighted linear combinations of the sensation magnitudes of the tones in the pairs. The time error can be regarded as an effect of this differential weighting. For the longer interstimulus intervals, the weight of the second tone was the greater, causing the usual inverse relation between time error and stimulus intensity level. For the shorter interstimulus intervals, these effects were reversed. An analysis of the pattern of weights led to the development of two models, one of which is a generalization of Michels and Helson's time error model. The weights could be interpreted as reflecting the differential efficiency of the loudness information from the two compared stimuli.     

Individual differences in loudness processing and loudness scales

Parameters of the psychophysical function for loudness (a 1000-Hz tone) were assessed for individual subjects in three experiments: (a) binaural loudness summation, (b) temporal loudness summation, and (c) judgments of loudness intervals. The loudness scales that underlay the additive binaural summation closely approximated S. S. Stevens's (1956) sone scale but were nonlinearly related to the scales that underlay the subtractive interval judgments, the latter approximating Garner's (1954) lambda scale. Interindividual differences in temporal summation were unrelated to differences in scaling performance or in binaural summation. Although the exponents of magnitude-estimation functions and the exponents underlying interval judgments varied considerably from subject to subject, exponents computed on the basis of underlying binaural summation varied less. The results suggest that interindividual variation in the exponent of magnitude-estimation functions largely reflects differences in the ways that subjects use numbers to describe loudnesses and that the sensory representations of loudness are fairly uniform, though probably not wholly uniform, among people with normal hearing. The magnitude of individual variation in at least one measure of auditory intensity processing, namely, temporal summation, seems at least as great as the magnitude of the variation in the underlying loudness scale.     

The additivity of loudness across critical bands: A conjoint measurement approach

Five subjects were required in each trial to compare directly two sounds and to indicate which sound was louder. Each of the 64 sounds employed consisted of a combination of one of eight intensity levels of a 2-kHz tone and one of eight intensities of a 5-kHz tone. If, as Fletcher and Munson (1933) argued, loudness is additive for tone combinations in which the frequencies are widely separated, then subjects’ judgments should reflect the summed loudnesses of the 2- and 5-kHz tones in a two-tone combination. Judgments of individual subjects were shown to satisfy the conditions for an additive structure, and individual loudness scales were constructed. These loudness scales varied from subject to subject. Since this paired comparison procedure minimized response biases, the results suggest substantial individual differences in the sensory representation of sound intensity. The relations among sensory scales derived from other structured sensory judgments, such as binaural loudness, are discussed.     

The measurement of loudness using direct comparisons of sensory intervals

Subjects were required in each trial to directly compare two pairs of tones and indicate which pair of tones had the greater loudness difference. Ten 1200 Hz tones differing only in intensity were employed. Subjects made binary comparisons among the 45 tone pairs which can be formed from the set of ten tones. The subjects' binary comparisons of the tone pairs were found to satisfy the transitivity and monotonicity requirements of a positive difference structure. These comparisons of loudness intervals were used to construct a rank order of loudness difference. A loudness scale was constructed from a nonmetric analysis of the rank order of loudness difference for the 45 tone pairs and indicated that loudness was a power function of sound pressure with an exponent of 0.26.     

On loudness enhancement of a tone burst by a preceding tone burst

The loudness level of a second tone burst in a monotic burst pair is investigated as a function of the intensity and frequency of the first burst relative to the corresponding variables of the second burst and as a function of the interburst time interval. The loudness level is measured with the help of a third, comparison burst whose frequency is the same as that of the second burst. The results, in connection with preceding results, show beyond any reasonable doubt that loudness effects in pairs of sound bursts are controlled by two perceptual processes: loudness enhancement and loudness summation. The first refers to the loudness of the second burst, the second, to the overall loudness of the burst pair. The time and frequency functions of the two processes are fundamentally different.     

Slippery context effect and critical bands.

This article explored the slippery context effect: When Ss judge the loudness of tones that differ in sound frequency as well as intensity, stimulus context (relative intensity levels at the 2 frequencies) can strongly influence the levels that are judged equally loud. It is shown that the size of the slippery context effect depends on the frequency difference between the tones: Small frequency differences (less than a critical bandwidth) produced essentially no slippery effect; much larger differences produced substantial effects. These results are consistent with a model postulating the existence of a central attentional or preattentive "filter-like" process whose weighting coefficients represent the size of the absolute as opposed to the relative (contextual) component of loudness perception and judgment.     

The perceptual basis of loudness ratio judgments

In Experiment 1, subjects were required to estimateloudness ratios for 45 pairs of tones. Ten 1,200-Hz tones, differing only in intensity, were used to generate the 45 distinct tone pairs. In Experiment 2, subjects were required to directly compare two pairs of tones (chosen from among the set of 45) and indicate which pair of tones had the greaterloudness ratio. In both Experiments 1 and 2, the subjects’ judgments were used to rank order the tone pairs with respect to their judged loudness ratios. Nonmetric analyses of these rank orders indicated that both magnitude estimates of loudness ratios and direct comparisons of loudness ratios were based on loudnessintervals ordifferences where loudness was a power function of sound pressure. These experiments, along with those on loudness difference judgments (Parker & Schneider, 1974; Schneider, Parker, & Stein, 1974), support Torgerson’s (1961) conjecture that there is but one comparative perceptual relationship for ioudnesses, and that differences in numerical estimates for loudness ratios as opposed to loudness intervals simply reflect different reporting strategies generated by the two sets of instructions.     

Intensity discrimination and loudness for tones in broadband noise

In two previous papers (Parker & Schneider, 1980; Schneider & Parker, 1987), we developed a model, based on Fechner's assumption, which successfully predicted the relationship between loudness and intensity discrimination for tones presented in quiet and in notched noise. In the present paper, pure-tone intensity-increment thresholds and loudness matches were determined for several levels of a standard tone in the presence of a broadband masker whose spectrum level was set to 35 dB below that of the standard tone. The model was unable to relate loudness to intensity discrimination under these conditions. Thus, the spectral composition of the masker affects the relationship between loudness and intensity discrimination in ways that cannot be accounted for by the model.     

Binaural and temporal integration of the loudness of tones and noises

Subjects judged the loudness of tones (Experiment 1) and of bursts of noise (Experiment 2) that varied in intensity and duration as well as in mode of presentation (monaural vs. binaural). Both monaural and binaural loudness, for both types of signals, obeyed the bilinear-interaction prediction of the classic temporal integration model. The loudness of short tones grows as a power function of both intensity and duration with different exponents for the two factors (.2 and .3, respectively). The loudness of wide-band noises grows as a power function of duration (with an exponent of approximately .6) but not of sound pressure. For tones, binaural summation was constant but fell short of full additivity. For noises, summation changed across level and duration. Temporal summation followed the same course for monaural and binaural tonal stimuli but not for noise stimuli. Notwithstanding these differences between tone and noise, we concluded that binaural and temporal summation are independently operating integrative networks within the auditory system. The usefulness of establishing the underlying metric structure for temporal summation is emphasized.     

Induced loudness reduction as a function of frequency difference between test tone and inducer

When a high-intensity tone (inducer) is followed by a moderate-intensity tone (test tone), the loudness of the latter is reduced. This phenomenon, called induced loudness reduction (ILR), depends on the frequency separation of the two tones; as the difference in frequency increases, the amount of ILR decreases. However, the precise course of this decrease is not well known. This article presents two experiments that address this question. In the first experiment, the amount of loudness reduction produced by a 2.5-kHz 80-dB-SPL inducer was measured with the frequency of the test tone swept from 800 Hz to 6 kHz. In the second experiment, the amount of ILR was measured with the same inducer and with test tones set at 2, 2.5, 3, and 4 kHz. Both experiments show that some ILR occurs at frequency separations as wide as four critical bands.     

Loudness and loudness discrimination

A model is developed which holds that pure-tone intensity discrimination and suprathreshold loudness judgments are based on the same sensory representation. In this model, loudness is a power function of sound intensity. When two tones are presented sequentially, each gives rise to a loudness value along the sensory continuum. In intensity-discrimination experiments, threshold is reached when the loudness difference between the tones exceeds a criterial value. For suprathreshold presentations of tone pairs, judgments of loudness differences are based on the loudness difference between the two tones. The model is shown to accord well with data from both classes of experiments.     

THE CONTINGENCY OF PERCEPTUAL PROCESSING: Context Modifies Equal-Loudness Relations

Abstract –The relative loudnesses of tones that differ in sound frequency can depend strongly on the stimulus context, that is, on the set of intensity levels m the stimulus ensemble Using a new paradigm, called matching in scaling, this investigation sought to confirm that context modifies loudness relations per se, and not, for example, only overt responses To this end, two experiments revealed that changes in stimulus context differentially affect direct comparisons of loudness of 500-Hz and 2,500-Hz tones, as well as numerical judgments of individual tones—when loudness matches and scaling judgments alike are obtained in the same experimental sessions These contingent effects vary dynamically over time as a function of the recent stimulus history A third experiment revealed analogous effects in a simple matching paradigm, with no numerical judgments at all These findings support the contention that basic properties of loudness perception—grounded in auditory processes often considered "low level"—nevertheless can be deeply contextual     

Magnitude judgments of loudness change for discrete, dynamic, and hybrid stimuli

Recent investigations of loudness change within stimuli have identified differences as a function of direction of change and power range (e.g., Canévet, Acustica, 62, 2136–2142, 1986; Neuhoff, Nature, 395, 123–124, 1998), with claims of differences between dynamic and static stimuli. Experiment 1 provides the needed direct empirical evaluation of loudness change across static, dynamic, and hybrid stimuli. Consistent with recent findings for dynamic stimuli, quantitative and qualitative differences in pattern of loudness change were found as a function of power change direction. With identical patterns of loudness change, only quantitative differences were found across stimulus type. In Experiment 2, Points of Subjective loudness Equality (PSE) provided additional information about loudness judgments for the static and dynamic stimuli. Because the quantitative differences across stimulus type exceed the magnitude that could be expected based upon temporal integration by the auditory system, other factors need to be, and are, considered.     

Dual loudness scales in individual subjects

Each of 7 subjects matched the loudness of a single tone to the loudness differences within tone pairs (Experiment 1), gave magnitude estimations of those differences (Experiment 2), and gave magnitude estimations of single tonal loudness (Experiment 3). Individual subjects used several loudness scales to perform these tasks, in accordance with Marks's (1979b) theory. At least 3 subjects used the same scale to match loudnesses to loudness differences and to give magnitude estimations of the loudness of single tones (Experiments 1 and 3), but used a shallower sloped scale when giving magnitude estimations of loudness differences (Experiment 2).     

Loudness effects in pairs of tone bursts

The loudness of dichotic and monotic pairs of short tone bursts was investigated as a function of the interburst time interval. For short intervals, the loudness was increased relative ty the loudness of a single burst. However, the loudness of a burst pair was equal to the loudness of the second burst in the pair and, therefore, no loudness summation but only a loudness enhancement took place. In dichotic bursts, the loudness enhancement decayed monotonically as the time interval increased, and the rate of decay increased with sound intensity. In monotic bursts, the loudness enhancement decayed to a minimum at about 40 msec, independent of sound intensity. It had a tendency to rebound at longer time intervals and go through a relative maximum in the vicinity of 200 msec. The results are interpreted in terms of an interaction of peripheral and central poststimulatory inhibition with temporal summation.     

Identification and discrimination of sweep formants

Earlier identification experiments with sweep tones are repeated with rising and falling single formant (band) sweeps, with durations ranging from 15 to 40 msec and sweep rates from 0 to 40 oct/sec. Steady-state portions of 100-msec duration are then added to the sweeps. The general conclusions are that the tendency to perceive level and slightly rising tones as falling, which was such a prominent feature of the earlier results, disappears as the stimuli become more complex, and that sweep discrimination seems to be a function of the difference between the initial and the final frequency of a sweep.