Median-based MAA estimation yields lower thresholds but proves more robust to unreliable runs

Evidence

These analyses showed a significant difference between N and W cues (mean MAA difference of around 10°, p = 0.0005) and a non-significant difference between N and T cues (mean MAA difference of around 5°, p = 0.06). — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Median-of-reversal-point threshold estimates are more robust to unreliable runs; Median is less sensitive to outliers than mean; Wide-cue pinna size improves MAA only for hearing-impaired listeners (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Median is less sensitive to outliers than mean #corroborates (0.95)
• Down-shifted Weinrich cues improve MAA in hearing-impaired listeners by about ten degrees #expands (0.95) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052
• Wide-cue pinna size improves MAA only for hearing-impaired listeners #qualifies (0.82)
• Normal-hearing MAA is unaffected by pinna cue type or reference angle #qualifies (0.80) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3118