ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023
A quick method for determining the relative minimum audible distance using sound images.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Above, Below, and Beyond: Distinct Vertical‑Plane Localization Profiles in Normal Hearing Listeners.Journal of otology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Auditory localization plays an essential role in various tasks, including spatial orientation, locomotion, attention and memory. Optimization of experimental routine is important for preliminary assessment of the subject's sound localization ability. In the present study, a new quick technique for estimating the relative minimum audible distance (RMAD) using sound images is introduced. Twenty adults with normal hearing took part in six RMAD measurements in free field. The reference RMAD values were obtained using a method of constant stimuli by physically positioning a real sound source. The same method was used with stationary sound images created by superposition of signals emitted by two loudspeakers. To optimize the measurements, the RMADs were determined for the sound images using two adaptive psychoacoustic procedures known as one-down, one-up and two-down, one-up staircases. The group-average RMADs obtained by the method of constant stimuli for both types of stimuli and by two adaptive procedures were similar, 7% (SD = 2%). The effect of whether subjects were sighted or blindfolded was not significant for measurements of RMAD to sound images. The average measurement times were 373 s (SD = 20 s) for the method of constant stimuli, 85 s (SD = 9 s) for the one-down, one-up, and 124 s (SD = 14 s) for the two-down, one-up procedure. The results are consistent with the previous studies and confirm the validity of the measurements of RMAD using adaptive procedures with stationary sound images as a quick method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36949259What 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.