ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2019
The impact of peripheral mechanisms on the precedence effect.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal weighting functions for interaural time and level differences. VI. Effects of pulse rate on modulated envelopes.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026Article
- Role of the Dorsal Cortex of the Inferior Colliculus in the Precedence Effect.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When two similar sounds are presented from different locations, with one (the lead) preceding the other (the lag) by a small delay, listeners typically report hearing one sound near the location of the lead sound source-this is called the precedence effect (PE). Several questions about the underlying mechanisms that produce the PE are asked. (1) How might listeners' relative weighting of cues at onset versus ongoing stimulus portions affect perceived lateral position of long-duration lead/lag noise stimuli? (2) What are the factors that influence this weighting? (3) Are the mechanisms invoked to explain the PE for transient stimuli applicable to long-duration stimuli? To answer these questions, lead/lag noise stimuli are presented with a range of durations, onset slopes, and lag-to-lead level ratios over headphones. Monaural, peripheral mechanisms, and binaural cue extraction are modeled to estimate the cues available for determination of perceived laterality. Results showed that all three stimulus manipulations affect the relative weighting of onset and ongoing cues and that mechanisms invoked to explain the PE for transient stimuli are also applicable to the PE, in terms of both onset and ongoing segments of long-duration, lead/lag stimuli.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.