Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23967944›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2013

Acoustical correlates of performance on a dynamic range compression discrimination task.

Andrew T Sabin, Frederick J Gallun, Pamela E Souza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew T SabinDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, 2240 Campus Drive, Evanston, Illinois 60201, USA. a-sabin@northwestern.edu
Frederick J Gallun
Pamela E Souza

Funding

Oregon Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR000128 · NCATS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI ELLISON, DAVID H · 2012 to 2015
$28.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000128NIDCD NIH HHS DC60014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dynamic range compression is widely used to reduce the difference between the most and least intense portions of a signal. Such compression distorts the shape of the amplitude envelope of a signal, but it is unclear to what extent such distortions are actually perceivable by listeners. Here, the ability to distinguish between compressed and uncompressed versions of a noise vocoded sentence was initially measured in listeners with normal hearing while varying the threshold, ratio, attack, and release parameters. This narrow condition was selected in order to characterize perception under the most favorable listening conditions. The average behavioral sensitivity to compression was highly correlated to several acoustical indices of modulation depth. In particular, performance was highly correlated to the Euclidean distance between the modulation spectra of the uncompressed and compressed signals. Suggesting that this relationship is not restricted to the initial test conditions, the correlation remained largely unchanged both (1) when listeners with normal hearing were tested using a time-compressed version of the original signal, and (2) when listeners with impaired hearing were tested using the original signal. If this relationship generalizes to more ecologically valid conditions, it will provide a straightforward method for predicting the detectability of compression-induced distortions.

Indexed as

AcousticsPerceptual MaskingSignal Detection, PsychologicalSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultAgedAudiometry, SpeechAuditory ThresholdCase-Control StudiesFemaleHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID23967944
PMCPMC3765331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.