ArticlePloS one2021
Discrimination of 2D wall textures by passive echolocation for different reflected-to-direct level difference configurations.
Article in PloS one, 2021. 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.
- Article
- Tom Pouce III, an Electronic White Cane for Blind People: Ability to Detect Obstacles and Mobility Performances.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we study people's ability to discriminate between different 2D textures of walls by passive listening to a pre-recorded tongue click in an auralized echolocation scenario. In addition, the impact of artificially enhancing the early reflection magnitude by 6dB and of removing the direct component while equalizing the loudness was investigated. Listening test results for different textures, ranging from a flat wall to a staircase, were assessed using a 2 Alternative-Forced-Choice (2AFC) method, in which 14 sighted, untrained participants were indicating 2 equally perceived stimuli out of 3 presented stimuli. The average performance of the listening subjects to discriminate between different textures was found to be significantly higher for walls at 5m distance, without overlap between the reflected and direct sound, compared to the same walls at 0.8m distance. Enhancing the reflections as well as removing the direct sound were found to be beneficial to differentiate textures. This finding highlights the importance of forward masking in the discrimination process. The overall texture discriminability was found to be larger for the walls reflecting with a higher spectral coloration.
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.