Factors influencing the minimum audible change in talker head orientation cues using diotic stimuli

Brendan T. Moriarty, Rohit M. Ananthanarayana, Brian B. Monson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The perception of a talker's head orientation is an ecologically relevant task. Humans are able to discriminate changes in talker head orientation using acoustic cues. Factors that may influence measures of this ability have not been well characterized. Here, we examined the minimum audible change in head orientation cues (MACHO) using diotic stimuli. The effects of several factors were tested: talker and gender, stimulus bandwidth (full-band vs low-pass filtered at 8 or 10 kHz), transducer (loudspeaker vs headphone), stimulus uncertainty (interleaved vs blocked presentation of four talkers), and vocal production mode (speech vs singing). The best performance of ∼41° was achieved for full-band, blocked presentation of speech over a loudspeaker. Greater stimulus uncertainty (interleaved presentation) worsened the MACHO by 26%. Bandlimiting at 8 and 10 kHz worsened performance by an additional 22% and 14%, respectively. At equivalent overall sound levels, performance was better for speech than for singing. There was some limited evidence for the transducer influencing the MACHO. These findings suggest the MACHO relies on multiple factors manipulated here. One of the largest, consistent effects was that of talker, suggesting head orientation cues are highly dependent on individual talker characteristics. This may be due to individual variability in speech directivity patterns.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)763-773
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of the Acoustical Society of America
Volume156
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2024

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Acoustics and Ultrasonics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Factors influencing the minimum audible change in talker head orientation cues using diotic stimuli'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this