[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: environmental non-noises
This idea does make sense, and there have been several studies on it.
1. Cummings et. al, (2006). Auditory semantic networks for words and
natural sounds, Brain Research, 1115, 92-107.
2. Lebrun et al. (2001). An ERD mapping study of the neurocognitive
processes involved in the perceptual and semantic analysis of
environmental sounds and words. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 235-248.
In general the process they used didn't distort meaningful sounds, but
measure the meaningfullness of the sounds, and then pick sounds that are
on opposite ends of the scaleing results.
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:51:53 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Honbolyg=F3_Ferenc?= <hf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: environmental non-noises
Dear List members,
We are currently working on an experiment about the semantical=20
processing of environmental noises. We are trying to do a similar task=20
as the lexical decision task with words and nonwords, but with=20
environmental noises and "non-noises". The problem is that we have a=20
hard time creating non-noises which are quite environmental noise-like,=20
but are not recognizable. We tried almost every distortion methods used=20
in the literature (reversing, spectrally-rotating, scrambling the parts)=20
but the sounds are always pretty much recognizable by most people.
Does anyone have any idea on how to create such non-recognizable=20
non-noises based on existing environmental noises? Or is this idea just=20
not feasible, because people will always think that what they heard is=20
Research Institute for Psychology, HAS
Department of Psychophysiology
Research Group of Developmental Psychophysiology
H-1394 Budapest, P.O.Box 398.
Tel: +361 354-2390
Fax: +361 354-2416