Informational masking arises when listeners can segregate signal from masker at higher processing levels

Evidence

In some cases the masking effect is reduced and cannot be explained with the masking effects discussed in the previous sections, which have been measured using simple sinusoids, noise, or transient sounds – types of masking called energetic masking (Watson, 2005). When the maskers and signals are more complex, reduced masking effects may be obtained, such as in speech-in-speech masking (Brungart, 2001). Such masking effects are called informational masking and can be thought to be caused by the ability of the human listener to segregate the signal and masker at a higher processing level. — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1014

Categorization

Category: Definitional Content

• DEFINE: Distinguishes energetic masking from informational masking — a key conceptual distinction in masking literature.
• XREF: Connects to cocktail party effect literature and to speech intelligibility in competing-talker scenarios.
• ADDENDUM: Directly relevant to audio reproduction and music mixing practice where informational masking limits what energetic-masking models predict.

Related

• Complex real-world maskers are less effective than simple energetic ones predict (similarity 0.93)
• Energetic and informational masking operate through distinct peripheral and central mechanisms (similarity 0.88)
• Masking noise prevents listeners from using unintended spectral cues (similarity 0.84)
• A masker’s intensity, frequency content, and temporal pattern determine its masking capability. (similarity 0.83)
• Backward masking is a weak and unreliable effect appearing mainly in novice listeners. (similarity 0.83)
• Masking experiments infer auditory representation from masker effects on signals. (similarity 0.83)
• Sounds mask both preceding and following sounds but forward masking dominates. (similarity 0.83)
• Masking shifts thresholds upward and may alter just-noticeable sound changes at all levels. (similarity 0.82)
• Masking occurs when one sound interferes with perceiving another (similarity 0.82)
• Masking depends on acoustic relationships between masker and signal, not on subjective noise. (similarity 0.82)
• Masking is quantified by the shift in a listener’s hearing-threshold curve (similarity 0.82)
• One tone can make another tone inaudible through masking (similarity 0.82)
• Partially masked sounds have a reduced loudness range in both time and spectrum (similarity 0.82)
• Simultaneous tones become harder to perceive due to masking effects (similarity 0.82)
• Masking relates closely to excitation level patterns. (similarity 0.81)