Normal-hearing MAA is unaffected by pinna cue type or reference angle

Evidence

A mixed-model ANOVA was used to analyze the NH MAA data. Besides a significant test-subject effect (p = 0.002) (the random variable “test subject” was only included as a main effect), the various effects in the model came out as being non-significant, as already indicated by the rather similar mean values shown in Fig. 6 . Thus, the NH-group performance did not depend on either cue type or reference angle. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3118

Besides a significant test-subject effect (p = 0.002) (the random variable “test subject” was only included as a main effect), the various effects in the model came out as being non-significant, as already indicated by the rather similar mean values shown in Fig. 6 . Thus, the NH-group performance did not depend on either cue type or reference angle. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052

Categorization

• XREF: NH subjects discriminate equally well with natural, transposed, and Weinrich cues — suggests normal-hearing flexibility in cue use that HI listeners lack. — connects to: Down-shifted Weinrich cues improve MAA in hearing-impaired listeners by about ten degrees — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052; Median-based MAA estimation yields lower thresholds but proves more robust to unreliable runs; Wide-cue pinna size improves MAA only for hearing-impaired listeners
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3118; Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052