Binaural localization accuracy depends on monaural coding efficiency before interaural comparison

Evidence

Lateralization performance based on ITDs and ILDs should reflect not only the listener’s ability to compare time and level information, respectively, between ears but also the efficiency of encoding information about the temporal structure and intensity of stimuli at stages below binaural interactions in auditory processing. … Our earlier study attempted to evaluate the relative contributions of these processing stages to the inter-listener variability in lateralization performance, by comparing individual listeners’ monaural sensitivities to the temporal structure and intensity of a sound stimulus with their ITD and ILD sensitivities (Ochi et al. 2014 ). The results showed significant correlation of ILD discrimination thresholds with thresholds for monaural level-increment detection task. This could be interpreted as indicating that the inter-individual differences in ILD sensitivity could be (partially) accounted for by the level coding efficiency at stages before binaural interaction. Similarly, ITD discrimination thresholds were found to correlate with the listeners’ sensitivities to the temporal structure of monaural stimuli, when the stimuli were in high frequency range (around 4000 Hz). However, we failed to find a positive correlation for stimuli in low-frequency range (around 1100 Hz). — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1026 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Lord Rayleigh (James William Strutt, 1843–1919) was strongly influenced by the work of Helmholtz. His book The Theory of Sound also discussed acoustic problems using mathematics. This work laid the groundwork for future study linking acoustics with perception. Rayleigh was also keenly interested in the ability to localize sounds in space. He proposed that two acoustic cues are used for sound localization: intensity differences and time differences across the ears. The intensity differences were produced by the presence of the head in the sound field, which can effectively block sound transmission. The time differences were produced by the differential travel times of sound across the ears. This theory, called the Duplex Theory of Sound Localization, has been validated numerous times (see Chapter 7). — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 70 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Binaural sound localization depends on ear-level temporal and intensity encoding efficiency — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 70; Peripheral monaural coding efficiency partly predicts binaural lateralization ability — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1026; Interaural level sensitivity reflects peripheral level-coding efficiency, not central processing. (+3 more)

Related

• Cortical intensity encoding becomes ear-independent through strong interhemispheric connections (similarity 0.89)
• Binaural sound localization depends on ear-level temporal and intensity encoding efficiency (similarity 0.89)
• Peripheral monaural coding efficiency partly predicts binaural lateralization ability (similarity 0.88)
• Rayleigh first proposed ILDs code high frequencies and ITDs code low frequencies (similarity 0.86)
• Inter-Listener variability in sound localization partly reflects peripheral coding efficiency that precedes binaural computation. (similarity 0.86)
• Head separation between ears produces arrival-time and intensity cues for direction (similarity 0.85)
• Monaural encoding efficiency partly explains inter-listener differences in binaural sensitivity (similarity 0.85)
• Inter-listener ILD differences arise from pre-binaural level-coding efficiency (similarity 0.82)
• Sound source location is encoded in waveform distortions between the ears (similarity 0.82)
• Directional hearing rests on interaural time and intensity differences. (similarity 0.81)
• Interaural timing alone cannot explain our sound localization ability (similarity 0.81)
• Horizontal localization uses binaural cues while vertical localization does not (similarity 0.81)
• Interaural level sensitivity reflects peripheral level-coding efficiency, not central processing. (similarity 0.80)
• Interaural level differences and time shifts trade off to control lateralization (similarity 0.80)
• The ear’s 1-2 ms time resolution makes monaural temporal cues unusable for localization. (similarity 0.80)

Broader Connections

• Peripheral monaural coding efficiency partly predicts binaural lateralization ability #corroborates (0.90) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1026
• Binaural sound localization depends on ear-level temporal and intensity encoding efficiency #corroborates (0.85) — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 70
• Interaural level sensitivity reflects peripheral level-coding efficiency, not central processing. #corroborates (0.85)
• Phase transitions hidden at envelope minima decrease monaural detection of interaural cues #qualifies (0.75) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2955