Two experiments are presented that serve as a framework for exploring auditory information processing. The framework is referred to as polychotic listening or auditory search, and it requires a listener to scan multiple simultaneous auditory streams for the appearance of a target word (the name of a letter such as A or M). Participants' ability to scan between two and six simultaneous auditory streams of letter and digit names for the name of a target letter was examined using six loudspeakers. The main independent variable was auditory load, or the number of active audio streams on a given trial. The primary dependent variables were target localization accuracy and reaction time. Results showed that as load increased, performance decreased. The performance decrease was evident in reaction time, accuracy, and sensitivity measures. The second study required participants to practice the same task for 10 sessions, for a total of 1800 trials. Results indicated that even with extensive practice, performance was still affected by auditory load. The present results are compared with findings in the visual search literature. The implications for the use of multiple auditory displays are discussed. Potential applications include cockpit and automobile warning displays, virtual reality systems, and training systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atkinson, R. C., Holmgren, J. E., & Juola, J. F. (1969). Processing time as influenced by the number of elements in a visual display. Perception and Psychophysics., 6, 321–336.
2.
Begault, D. R. (1996). Multichannel spatialization audio engine. NASA Tech Briefs (Patent No. 5,438,623). New York: Associated Business Publications.
3.
Begault, D. R., & Erbe, T. (1994). Multichannel spatial auditory display for speech communications. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 42, 819–826.
4.
Blauert, J. (1983). Spatial hearingCambridge: MIT Press.
5.
Bronkhorst, A. W., Veltman, J. A., & van Breda, L. (1996). Application of a three-dimensional auditory display in a flight task. Human Factors, 38, 23–33.
6.
Cherry, E. C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and two ears. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25, 975–979.
7.
Coyne, J. & Lee, M. D.M (2000). Errors in multi-channel auditory search: Localization vs. detection. In D. B. Kaber & M. R. Endsley (Eds.), Proceedings of the Human Performance, Situation Awareness, and Automation Conference (pp. 184–189). Starkville, MS: Mississippi State University.
8.
Crispien, K., & Ehrenberg, T. (1994, October). Evaluation of the “cocktail party effect” for multiple speech stimuli within a spatial audio display. Paper presented at the Audio Engineering Society 97th Convention (Preprint no. 3891), San Francisco, CA.
9.
Cunningham, A. N., & Lee, M. D. (2000, May). Influence of speaker gender on target detection in auditory search. Paper presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Virginia Academy of Science, Radford, VA.
10.
Deutsch, J. A., & Deutsch, D. (1963). Attention: Some theoretical considerations. Psychological Review, 70, 80–90.
11.
Doll, T. J., Gerth, J. M., Engelman, W. R., & Folds, D. J. (1986). Development of simulated directional audio for cockpit applications (Report No. AAMRL-TR-86-014). Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.
12.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458.
13.
Ericson, M. A., & McKinley, R. L. (1997). The intelligibility of multiple talkers separated spatially in noise. In R. H. Gilkey & T. R. Anderson (Eds.), Binaural and spatial hearing in real and virtual environments (pp. 701–724). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Fisher, D. L. (1982). Limited-channel models of automatic detection: Capacity and scanning in visual search. Psychological Review, 89, 662–692.
15.
Fisher, D. L., Duffy, S. A., Young, C., & Pollatsek A. (1988). Understanding the central processing limit in consistent-mapping visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 263–266.
16.
Folds, D. J., Gerth, J. M., & Mayfield, S. R. (1990). The effects of angular separation of auditory information sources on performance in a dual task environment. Unpublished research report, Systems Engineering Lab, Georgia Tech Research Institute, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
17.
Folds, D. J., King, L. C., & Gerth, J. M. (1989). Consequences of individual differences in brain organization for complex human performance (contract number MDA903-86-K-0320). Alexandria, VA: U. S. Army Research Institute.
18.
Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysicsNew York: Wiley.
19.
Hull, A. D. (1976). Reducing sources of error in transmission of alphanumeric codes. Applied Ergonomics, 7, 75–78.
20.
Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1995). Auditory babble and cognitive efficiency: Role of number of voices and their location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 216–226.
21.
King, L. C. (1994). Auditory ambiance as information display. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
22.
Kristofferson, M. W. (1972). Effects of practice on character classification performance. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 26, 54–60.
23.
Lee, M. D., & Burgess, D. A. (1993, October). The application of synthesized three-dimensional auditory cues to aircraft cockpits: Accuracy and the effects of stimulus bandwidth. Paper presented at the 36th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, Seattle, WA.
24.
Lee, M. D., & Patterson, R. W. (1994, October). The application of three-dimensional auditory displays to aircraft cockpits: User requirements, technology assessment, and operational recommendations. Paper presented at the Speech Recognition Conference, New York.
25.
Miller, G. A., & Isard, S. I. (1963). Some perceptual consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 217–228.
26.
Mills, A. W. (1958). On the minimum audible angle. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 30, 237–246.
27.
Mills, A. W. (1972). Auditory localization. In J. V. Tobias (Ed.), Foundations of modern auditory theory (vol. 2, pp. 303–348). New York: Academic.
28.
Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instruction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 56–60.
29.
Oldfield, S., & Parker, S. (1984a). Acuity of sound localization: A topography of auditory space: I. Normal hearing conditions. Perception, 13, 581–600.
30.
Oldfield, S., & Parker, S. (1984b). Acuity of sound localization: A topography of auditory space: II. Pinna cues absent. Perception, 13, 601–617.
31.
Phillips D. P., & Brugge, J. F. (1985). Progress in neurophysiology of sound localization. Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 245–274.
32.
Rudmann, D. S., & Strybel, T. Z. (1999). Auditory spatial facilitation of visual search performance: Effect of cue precision and distractor density. Human Factors, 41, 146–160.
33.
Schneider W., & Fisk, A. D. (1982). Degree of consistent training: Improvements in search performance and automatic process development. Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 160–168.
34.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
35.
Shiffrin, R. M. (1988). Attention. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Hernstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology (pp. 739–811). New York: Wiley.
36.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Dumais, S. T. (1981). The development of automatism. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 111–140). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
38.
Spieth, W., Curtis, J. F., & Webster, J. C. (1954). Responding to one of two simultaneous messages. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 26, 391–396.
39.
Sternberg, S. (1966). High-speed scanning in human memory. Science, 153, 652–654.
40.
Sternberg, S. (1967). Two operations in character recognition: Some evidence from reaction time measurements. Perception and Psychophysics, 2, 45–53.
41.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In W. G. Koster (Ed.), Attention and performance II (pp. 276–315). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
42.
Stevens, S. S., & Newman, E. B. (1936). The localization of actual sound sources. American Journal of Psychology, 48, 297–306.
43.
Treisman, A. M., & Riley, J. G. A. (1969). Is selective attention selective perception or selective response? A further test. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 27–34.
44.
Wenzel, E. (1992). Localization in virtual acoustic displays. Presence, 1, 81–107
