Frequency-difference and frequency-modulation thresholds must not be conflated in the literature
Evidence
It should be noted that just-noticeable differences in frequency and the corresponding results from frequency modulation are sometimes mixed up in the literature. This leads to confusion that ought to be avoided. A clear separation of the two kinds of data sets is helpful; it may even be necessary to separate the data further on the basis of the method used. — Professor Dr.-Ing. Hugo Fastl, Professor Dr.-Ing. Eberhard, Psychoacoustics- Facts and Models, 1070
Categorization
Category: Craft and Method
- SHARE: A precision warning worth passing to anyone reading or citing psychoacoustic data: DLf vs. FM thresholds differ threefold and are commonly confused.
Related
- Frequency-discrimination and frequency-modulation thresholds are commonly conflated in the literature (similarity 0.91)
- Literature conflating frequency discrimination and FM detection data produces serious confusion (similarity 0.82)
- Frequency modulation detection is level-independent but thrice frequency-difference detection (similarity 0.81)
- Just-noticeable level variations always exceed just-noticeable level differences (similarity 0.81)
- Frequency discrimination depends on pitch strength and worsens as pitch strength falls (similarity 0.80)
- Absolute frequency discrimination worsens as reference frequency increases (similarity 0.79)
- Frequency discrimination thresholds rise dramatically from 500 Hz to 5000 Hz (similarity 0.79)
- Phase differences affect loudness only at low modulation frequencies the ear can track (similarity 0.79)
- Frequency just-noticeable differences rise sharply at low sensation levels (similarity 0.78)