Off-frequency masking of the second formant by energy at the first formant has been shown to influence both identification and discrimination of the second formant in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. While both excitatory spread and two-tone suppression have been implicated in this simultaneous masking, their relative contribution has been shown to depend on both the level of the masker and the frequency separation between the probe and the masker. Off-frequency masking effects were evaluated in 10 normal-hearing human adults using the frequency-following response (FFR) to two two-tone approximations of vowel stimuli (/a/ and /u/). In the first experiment, the masking effect of F1 on F2 was evaluated by attenuating the level of F1 relative to a fixed F2 level. In the second experiment, the masking effect was evaluated by increasing the frequency separation between F1 and F2 using F2 frequency as the variable. Results revealed that both attenuation of the F1 level, and increasing the frequency separation between F1 and F2 increased the magnitude of the FFR component at F2. These results are consistent with a release from off-frequency masking. Given that the results presented here are for high signal and masker levels and for relatively smaller frequency separation between the masker and the probe, it is possible that both suppression and excitatory spread contributed to the masking effects observed in our data.

Keywords:
Phase-locked activity, Speech-like sounds, Off-frequency masking, Excitatory spread, Two-tone suppression, Formant capture
1.
Aiken S, Picton TW: Envelope and spectral frequency-following responses to vowel sounds. Hear Res 2008;245:35–47.
2.
Brugge JF, Anderson DJ, Hind JE, Rose JE: Time structure of discharges in single auditory nerve fibers of the squirrel monkey in response to complex periodic sounds. J Neurophysiol 1969;32:386–401.
3.
Danaher EM, Osberger MJ, Pickett JM: Discrimination of formant frequency transitions in synthetic vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 1973;16:439–451.
4.
Danaher EM, Pickett JM: Some masking effects produced by low-frequency vowel formants in persons with sensorineural hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 1975;18:261–271.
5.
Delgutte B: Physiological mechanisms of masking; in Duifhuis H, Horst JW, Wit HP (eds): Basic Issues in Hearing. London, Academic, 1988.
6.
Delgutte B: Physiological mechanisms of psychophysical masking: observations from auditory nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 1990a;87:791–809.
7.
Delgutte B: Two-tone rate suppression in auditory-nerve fibers: dependence on suppressor frequency and level. Hear Res 1990b;49:225–246.
8.
Delgutte B: Physiological models of for basic auditory percepts; in Hawkins HL, McMullen TA, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds): Auditory Computation. New York, Springer, 1996.
9.
Dorman MF, Lindholm JM, Hannley T: Influence of the first formant on the recognition of voiced stop consonants by hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1985;28:377–380.
10.
Egan JP, Hake HW: On the masking pattern of a simple auditory stimulus. J Acoust Soc Am 1950;22:622–630.
11.
Fletcher H: Auditory patterns. Rev Mod Phys 1940;12:47–75.
12.
Gifford RH, Bacon SP: Contributions of suppression and excitation to simultaneous masking: effects of signal frequency and masker-signal frequency relation. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:2188–2200.
13.
Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ: Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. J Acoust Soc Am 1986;79:1020–1033.
14.
Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ: Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. Scand Audiol 1989;32:1–25.
15.
Glaser EM, Suter CM, Dasheiff R, Goldberg A: The human frequency-following response: its behavior during continuous tone and tone burst stimulation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1976;40:25–32.
16.
Hannley M, Dorman MF: Susceptibility to intraspeech spread of masking in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1983;74:40–51.
17.
Krishnan A: Human frequency-following responses to two-tone approximations of steady-state vowels. Audiol Neurotol 1999;4:95–103.
18.
Krishnan A: Human frequency-following responses: representation of steady-state synthetic vowels. Hear Res 2002;166:192–201.
19.
Leek MR, Summers V: Auditory filter shapes of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners in continuous background noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1993;94:3127–3137.
20.
Marsh JT, Brown WS, Smith JC: Differential brainstem pathways for the conduction of auditory frequency following responses. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1974;38:415–422.
21.
Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR: Interpreting the role of suppression in psychophysical tuning curves. J Acoust Soc Am 1982;72:1374–1379.
22.
Moore BCJ, Vickers DA: The role of spread excitation and suppression in simultaneous masking. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;66:470–479.
23.
Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ: A behavioral measure of the basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;101:3666–3675.
24.
Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ: Suppression and the upward spread of masking. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;104:3500–3510.
25.
Pang XD, Guinan JJ: Growth rate of simultaneous masking in cat auditory-nerve fibers: relationship to the growth of basilar membrane motion and the origin of two-tone suppression. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;102:3564–3575.
26.
Peterson GE, Barney HL: Control methods used in a study of the vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 1952;24:175–184.
27.
Pickett JM, Danaher EM: On discrimination of formant transitions by persons with severe sensorineural hearing loss; in Fant G, Tatham MAA (eds): Auditory Analysis and perception of Speech. New York, Academic 1975, pp 275–292.
28.
Pickles JO: Frequency threshold curves and simultaneous masking functions in single fibres of the guinea pig auditory nerve. Hear Res 1984;14:245–256.
29.
Ruggero MA, Robles L, Rich NC: Two-tone suppression in the basilar membrane of the cochlea: mechanical basis of auditory nerve rate suppression. J Neurophysiol 1992;68:1087–1099.
30.
Sachs MB, Kiang NYS: Two-tone inhibition in auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 1968;43:1120–1128.
31.
Smith JC, Marsh JT, Brown WS: Far-field recorded frequency-following responses: evidence for the locus of brainstem sources. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1975;39:465–472.
32.
Summers V, Leek MR: Intraspeech spread of masking in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;101:2866–2876.
33.
Weber DL: Do off-frequency simultaneous maskers suppress the signal? J Acoust Soc Am 1983;73:887–893.
34.
Wegel RL, Lane CE: The auditory masking of one pure tone by another and its probable relation to the dynamics of the inner ear. Physiol Rev 1924;23:266–285.
35.
Wightman FL, McGee T, Kramer M: Factors influencing frequency selectivity in normal and hearing-impaired listeners; in Evans EF, Wilson JP (eds): Psychophysics and Physiology of Hearing. London, Academic Press Inc, 1977.
36.
Worden FG, Marsh JT: Frequency-following (microphonic-like) neural responses evoked by sound. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1968;25:42–52.
37.
Zwicker E: Masking and psychological excitation as consequences of the ear’s frequency analysis; in Plomp R, Smoorenburg GF (eds): Frequency Analysis and Periodicity Detection in Hearing. Leiden, Sijthoff, 1970.
38.
Zwicker E, Fastl H: Psychoacoustics – Facts and Models. Berlin, Springer, 1990.
© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
2009
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.