↓ Skip to main content

Temporal Resolution Needed for Auditory Communication: Measurement With Mosaic Speech

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Temporal Resolution Needed for Auditory Communication: Measurement With Mosaic Speech
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshitaka Nakajima, Mizuki Matsuda, Kazuo Ueda, Gerard B. Remijn

Abstract

Temporal resolution needed for Japanese speech communication was measured. A new experimental paradigm that can reflect the spectro-temporal resolution necessary for healthy listeners to perceive speech is introduced. As a first step, we report listeners' intelligibility scores of Japanese speech with a systematically degraded temporal resolution, so-called "mosaic speech": speech mosaicized in the coordinates of time and frequency. The results of two experiments show that mosaic speech cut into short static segments was almost perfectly intelligible with a temporal resolution of 40 ms or finer. Intelligibility dropped for a temporal resolution of 80 ms, but was still around 50%-correct level. The data are in line with previous results showing that speech signals separated into short temporal segments of <100 ms can be remarkably robust in terms of linguistic-content perception against drastic manipulations in each segment, such as partial signal omission or temporal reversal. The human perceptual system thus can extract meaning from unexpectedly rough temporal information in speech. The process resembles that of the visual system stringing together static movie frames of ~40 ms into vivid motion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 7 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 22%
Neuroscience 3 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#7,349,573
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,093
of 7,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,810
of 327,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#68
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 140 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.