Explaining individual differences in head‐related transfer functions

1999 ◽  
Vol 105 (2) ◽  
pp. 1036-1036
Author(s):  
Frederic L. Wightman ◽  
Doris J. Kistler
2003 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 2021-2030 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan W. H. Schnupp ◽  
John Booth ◽  
Andrew J. King

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Mundy

Abstract The stereotype of people with autism as unresponsive or uninterested in other people was prominent in the 1980s. However, this view of autism has steadily given way to recognition of important individual differences in the social-emotional development of affected people and a more precise understanding of the possible role social motivation has in their early development.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily F. Wissel ◽  
Leigh K. Smith

Abstract The target article suggests inter-individual variability is a weakness of microbiota-gut-brain (MGB) research, but we discuss why it is actually a strength. We comment on how accounting for individual differences can help researchers systematically understand the observed variance in microbiota composition, interpret null findings, and potentially improve the efficacy of therapeutic treatments in future clinical microbiome research.


Author(s):  
K.-H. Herrmann ◽  
E. Reuber ◽  
P. Schiske

Aposteriori deblurring of high resolution electron micrographs of weak phase objects can be performed by holographic filters [1,2] which are arranged in the Fourier domain of a light-optical reconstruction set-up. According to the diffraction efficiency and the lateral position of the grating structure, the filters permit adjustment of the amplitudes and phases of the spatial frequencies in the image which is obtained in the first diffraction order.In the case of bright field imaging with axial illumination, the Contrast Transfer Functions (CTF) are oscillating, but real. For different imageforming conditions and several signal-to-noise ratios an extensive set of Wiener-filters should be available. A simple method of producing such filters by only photographic and mechanical means will be described here.A transparent master grating with 6.25 lines/mm and 160 mm diameter was produced by a high precision computer plotter. It is photographed through a rotating mask, plotted by a standard plotter.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document