ITD sensitivity depends on phase differences, not absolute conduction latencies

Evidence

Nevertheless, we point out that while these depth-dependent changes in delay would be expected from multiple recordings from the same NM axon, they were not required for ITD sensitivity. Sensitivity to ITDs should be instead conferred by the differences in phase. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2842

Categorization

• XREF: Ties to my death-and-dignity reading theme only loosely, but strongly connects to the chapter’s stated purpose on physiology and psychoacoustics of normal hearing — the surprise that phase, not latency, does the work is the pay-off of the whole delay-line story. — connects to: Microsecond ITD precision arises from phase-delay matching, not absolute latency — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2848; Age worsens ITD sensitivity only for high-frequency stimulation, not low-frequency.; An all-pass filter alters phase and timing but not amplitude — David Howard, Jamie Angus, coustics and Psychoacoustics, 481 (+2 more)
• corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2842

Broader Connections

• Age worsens ITD sensitivity only for high-frequency stimulation, not low-frequency. #qualifies (0.80)
• Coincidence detection models were extended to also encode ILD sensitivity #expands (0.75)
• Phase differences among wavelets reduce the total difference-tone amplitude #exemplifies (0.75)
• An all-pass filter alters phase and timing but not amplitude #expands (0.72) — David Howard, Jamie Angus, coustics and Psychoacoustics, 481