Evidence that adaptation of suppression cannot account for auditory enhancement or enhanced forward masking.

B. A. Wright*, D. McFadden

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Delaying the onset of a signal relative to the onset of a simultaneous notched masker often improves the ability of listeners to 'hear out' the signal at both threshold and suprathreshold levels. Viemeister & Bacon (J. acoust. Soc. Am., 71, 1502-1507 (1982)) suggested that such auditory enhancement effects could be accounted for if the suppression produced by the masker on the signal frequency adapted, thereby releasing the signal from suppression. In support of their hypothesis, Viemeister & Bacon reported that a masker preceded by an enhancer having no component at the signal frequency produced more forward masking than did the masker by itself. Here evidence is provided from five new experiments showing that adaptation of psychophysical two-tone suppression is inadequate to account either for auditory enhancement effects or for the enhanced forward masking demonstrated by Viemeister & Bacon.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)325-328; discussion 328-329
JournalPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences
Volume336
Issue number1278
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 29 1992

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evidence that adaptation of suppression cannot account for auditory enhancement or enhanced forward masking.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this