Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25595542›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2015

Near-field discrimination of sound source distance in the rabbit.

Shigeyuki Kuwada, Duck O Kim, Kelly-Jo Koch, Kristina S Abrams, Fabio Idrobo, Pavel Zahorik, Laurel H Carney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2015. 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. Review
  3. Auditory distance coding in rabbit midbrain neurons and human perception: monaural amplitude modulation depth as a cue.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015
    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

7 authors.

Shigeyuki KuwadaDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, 06030, USA.
Duck O Kim
Kelly-Jo Koch
Kristina S Abrams
Fabio Idrobo
Pavel Zahorik
Laurel H Carney

Funding

DEVELOPING AND TESTING MODELS OF THE AUDITORY SYSTEM WITH & WITHOUT HEARING LOSSR01DC010813 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI CARNEY, LAUREL H. · 2011 to 2025
$5.4M
NEURAL MECHANISMS OF BINAURAL HEARINGR01DC002178 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI KUWADA, SHIGEYUKI · 1994 to 2011
$3.3M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC002178NIDCD NIH HHS R01-DC002178NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC010813
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The acoustical cues and physiological processing mechanisms underlying the perception of the distance of sound sources are not well understood. To understand the relation between physiology and behavior, a first step is to use an animal model to study distance sensitivity. The goal of these experiments was to establish the capacity of the Dutch-belted rabbit to discriminate between sound sources at two distances. Trains of noise bursts were presented from speakers that were located either directly in front of the rabbit or at a 45 ° angle in azimuth. The reference speaker was positioned at distances of 20, 40, and 60 cm from the subject, and the more distant test speaker was systematically moved to determine the smallest difference in distance that could be reliably discriminated by the subject. Noise stimuli had one of three bandwidths: wideband (0.1-10 kHz), low-pass (0.1-3 kHz), or high-pass (3-10 kHz). The mean stimulus level was 60 dB sound pressure level (SPL) at the location of the rabbit's head, and the level was roved over a 12-dB range from trial to trial to reduce the availability of level cues. An operant one-interval two-alternative non-forced choice task was used, with a blocked two-down-one-up tracking procedure to determine the distance discriminability. Rabbits were consistently able to discriminate two distances when they were sufficiently separated. Sensitivity was better when the reference distance was 60 cm at either azimuth (distance ratio = 1.5) and was worse when the reference distance was 20 cm (distance ratio = 2.4 at 0 ° and 1.75 at 45 °).

Indexed as

AnimalsAuditory ThresholdDiscrimination, PsychologicalFemaleNoiseRabbitsSound Localization

Identifiers

PMID25595542
PMCPMC4368658

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.