Discrimination learning by monkeys with spatial separation of cue and response.

1962 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 876-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Stollnitz ◽  
Allan M. Schrier
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Spatial Separation

Effect of Spatial Separation of Stimuli on Children's Discrimination Learning

1974 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire F. Etaugh ◽  
Barbara K. Pope
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Spatial Separation

The Effect of Nonlinear Amplitude Growth on the Speech Perception Benefits Provided by a Single-Sided Vocoder

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 745-757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Wess ◽  
Joshua G. W. Bernstein
Keyword(s):  
Transfer Functions ◽  
Spatial Configuration ◽  
Free Field ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Compression And Expansion ◽  
Interaural Difference ◽  
Interaural Differences ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Perceptual Separation ◽  
Loudness Growth

PurposeFor listeners with single-sided deafness, a cochlear implant (CI) can improve speech understanding by giving the listener access to the ear with the better target-to-masker ratio (TMR; head shadow) or by providing interaural difference cues to facilitate the perceptual separation of concurrent talkers (squelch). CI simulations presented to listeners with normal hearing examined how these benefits could be affected by interaural differences in loudness growth in a speech-on-speech masking task.MethodExperiment 1 examined a target–masker spatial configuration where the vocoded ear had a poorer TMR than the nonvocoded ear. Experiment 2 examined the reverse configuration. Generic head-related transfer functions simulated free-field listening. Compression or expansion was applied independently to each vocoder channel (power-law exponents: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2).ResultsCompression reduced the benefit provided by the vocoder ear in both experiments. There was some evidence that expansion increased squelch in Experiment 1 but reduced the benefit in Experiment 2 where the vocoder ear provided a combination of head-shadow and squelch benefits.ConclusionsThe effects of compression and expansion are interpreted in terms of envelope distortion and changes in the vocoded-ear TMR (for head shadow) or changes in perceived target–masker spatial separation (for squelch). The compression parameter is a candidate for clinical optimization to improve single-sided deafness CI outcomes.

Distinctive Phonetic Features as Relevant and Irrelevant Stimulus Dimensions in Speech-Sound Discrimination Learning

1974 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-425
Author(s):  
Stuart I. Ritterman ◽  
Nancy C. Freeman
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Irrelevant Dimension ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Irrelevant Stimulus ◽  
Relevant Dimension ◽  
Phonetic Features ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
Nonsense Syllables

Thirty-two college students were required to learn the relevant dimension in each of two randomized lists of auditorily presented stimuli. The stimuli consisted of seven pairs of CV nonsense syllables differing by two relevant dimension units and from zero to seven irrelevant dimension units. Stimulus dimensions were determined according to Saporta’s units of difference. No significant differences in performance as a function of number of the irrelevant dimensions nor characteristics of the relevant dimension were observed.

Cognitive Development Meets Discrimination Learning

1996 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. 1109-1110
Author(s):  
Deborah G. Kemler Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Discrimination Learning

Temporal Discrimination Learning Based on Feature-Target Intervals

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. James Kehoe ◽  
Kristin G. Boesenberg ◽  
Natasha White ◽  
Benjamin Carr ◽  
Gabrielle Weidemann
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Temporal Discrimination ◽  
Feature Target
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document