Subject: Re: FW: cross-modality-size-loud From: Densil Cabrera <d.cabrera@xxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:59:20 +1000 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>Peter, No, I'm not aware of any study relating image size to perceived object size, but others may be aware of some (or else ways of interpreting multiple studies so as to infer such a relationship). However, it's worth pointing out that in some experimental contexts (e.g. hidden loudspeaker arrays) the distinction between the two is subtle. This may be one reason why our image size results were compressed compared to 'volume' and 'auditory source width' (auditorium acoustics) experiment results (in the ICAD paper) - because the there is no sounding object in the volume studies, and there is a strong distinction between image and object in ASW studies. It would be interesting to examine this with regard to the sounds of natural/naturalistic sounding objects. Perhaps Massimo, Dik or others have ideas on this. regards Densil -----Original Message----- From: AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception [mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Peter Lennox Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2007 9:00 PM To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: FW: cross-modality-size-loud Densil, Do you if anyone has mapped measures of image size (or apparent source width - which, as Potard pointed out can actually refere to height as well as width) to judgements of size-of-object? regards ppl Dr. Peter Lennox S.P.A.R.G. Signal Processing Applications Research Group University of Derby http://sparg.derby.ac.uk Int. tel: 3155 >>> Densil Cabrera <d.cabrera@xxxxxxxx> 19/09/2007 04:44 >>> Dear list, The idea of 'auditory volume' seems to be related to this discussion. Investigated mostly in the first decades of the 20th Century, auditory volume is a subjective judgment of the 'size' of sound - or more precisely, the size of the auditory image. That's different to the size of a sound source, but it may be related 'ecologically'. S.S. Stevens' PhD thesis is about volume and loudness (Harvard 1933). The general findings in the early years was that judgments of size were positively correlated to sound pressure level, and negatively correlated to the frequency (of pure tones). Later research investigated the perceived size of noise bands (effect of bandwidth), the effect of duration, and the effect of interaural coherence. Over the past 40 or so years, the concept of auditory image size has come to be considered important in auditorium acoustics and spatial audio. The most investigated parameter in those fields has been the interaural cross correlation function. However recent work by Russell Mason (in spatial audio) and Ingo Witew (in auditorium acoustics) seems to show some connection to the phenomena investigated in the auditory 'volume' literature. You can confirm the phenomenon of sound pressure level affecting auditory image size by concealing a loudspeaker behind a curtain with a visual grid on it, and for various stimuli asking subjects to identify the edges of the (apparent) sound source. This is what we did some years ago in: D. Cabrera and S. Tilley (2003) "Parameters for auditory display of height and size," 9th International Conference on Auditory Display, Boston , USA , 29-32. (available from www.icad.org <http://www.icad.org/> ). [By the way, if anyone is interested in the other aspect of that paper - pitch-height vs vertical localization, we have recently published on that: D. Cabrera and M. Morimoto (2007) "Influence of fundamental frequency and source elevation on the vertical localization of complex tones and complex tone pairs," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122(1), 478-488.] Densil Cabrera Head, Acoustics Research Laboratory Associate Dean (Research) Faculty of Architecture, Design and Planning University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia Tel. +612 9351 5267 Skype densilcabrera Fax. +612 9351 3031 densil@xxxxxxxx www.arch.usyd.edu.au/~densil/ On 17/09/2007, pieter jan stallen <pj.stallen@xxxxxxxx> wrote: Dear List, Does anyone know of experimental psychological data reported which refutes (or not) the hypothesis: the perception of object O as "has much of quality X" predisposes to the perception also of "has much of quality Y"? E.g., is there empirical evidence for cross-modal bonds like "large objects (much of size) are loud objects (much of sound)" ? Although I see brain research approaching the subject (e.g. http://www.dhushara.com/pdf/synesthesia.pdf <http://www.dhushara.com/pdf/synesthesia.pdf> ) I have not (yet) found so much empirical psychology about such metaphors. I may not have studied carefully enough the synaestesia literature, but appreciate any more specific 'forwardings' then. Pieter Jan Stallen / Chair Community Noise Annoyance / University of Leiden / Netherlands -- Dr Jan Schnupp University of Oxford Dept. of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics Sherrington Building - Parks Road Oxford OX1 3PT - UK +44-1865-272513 www.oxfordhearing.com <http://www.oxfordhearing.com/> -- Dr. Bob Carlyon MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit 15 Chaucer Rd. Cambridge CB2 7EF England Phone: +44 1223 355294 ext 651 Fax: +44 1223 359062 www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk <http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/> ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________