↓ Skip to main content

Do you hear where I hear?: isolating the individualized sound localization cues

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Do you hear where I hear?: isolating the individualized sound localization cues
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00370
Pubmed ID
Authors

Griffin D. Romigh, Brian D. Simpson

Abstract

It is widely acknowledged that individualized head-related transfer function (HRTF) measurements are needed to adequately capture all of the 3D spatial hearing cues. However, many perceptual studies have shown that localization accuracy in the lateral dimension is only minimally decreased by the use of non-individualized head-related transfer functions. This evidence supports the idea that the individualized components of an HRTF could be isolated from those that are more general in nature. In the present study we decomposed the HRTF at each location into average, lateral and intraconic spectral components, along with an ITD in an effort to isolate the sound localization cues that are responsible for the inter-individual differences in localization performance. HRTFs for a given listener were then reconstructed systematically with components that were both individualized and non-individualized in nature, and the effect of each modification was analyzed via a virtual localization test where brief 250 ms noise bursts were rendered with the modified HRTFs. Results indicate that the cues important for individualization of HRTFs are contained almost exclusively in the intraconic portion of the HRTF spectra and localization is only minimally affected by introducing non-individualized cues into the other HRTF components. These results provide new insights into what specific inter-individual differences in head-related acoustical features are most relevant to sound localization, and provide a framework for how future human-machine interfaces might be more effectively generalized and/or individualized.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 4%
Brazil 2 3%
Argentina 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 66 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 33%
Researcher 18 25%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 29 40%
Computer Science 9 12%
Arts and Humanities 5 7%
Psychology 5 7%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 8 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2014.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,137
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#315,276
of 369,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#116
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.