Meunier, Sabine

Moore, Brian C. J.

Van Eeckhoutte, Maaike

PubMed

Apollo (Cambridge)

EDITORIALpublished: 15 November 2021doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.785093Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 November 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 785093Edited and reviewed by:Robert J. Zatorre,McGill University, Canada*Correspondence:Sabine Meuniermeunier@lma.cnrs-mrs.frSpecialty section:This article was submitted toAuditory Cognitive Neuroscience,a section of the journalFrontiers in PsychologyReceived: 28 September 2021Accepted: 14 October 2021Published: 15 November 2021Citation:Meunier S, Van Eeckhoutte M andMoore BCJ (2021) Editorial:Loudness: From Neuroscience toPerception.Front. Psychol. 12:785093.doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.785093Editorial: Loudness: FromNeuroscience to PerceptionSabine Meunier 1*, Maaike Van Eeckhoutte 2,3 and Brian C. J. Moore 41 Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS, Centrale Marseille, LMA, Marseille, France, 2Hearing Systems, Department of Health Technology,Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 3Copenhagen Hearing and Balance Center, Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT)and Audiology Clinic, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark, 4Cambridge Hearing Group,Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United KingdomKeywords: loudness, psychophysics, temporal and frequency integration, binaural loudness, hearing aids andcochlear implantEditorial on the Research TopicLoudness: From Neuroscience to PerceptionLoudness is the sensation that allows judgment of whether a sound is strong or soft. Sounds canbe characterized by several perceptual features and among them loudness plays an important role.Loudness is very important for sound quality. Noise annoyance is mainly influenced by loudness,because, in most situations, the louder the sound, the more annoying it is. It is very important tocontrol loudness for users of hearing aids and cochlear implants, for whom the loudness of soundsmust be appropriate and the temporal fluctuations in loudness (particularly for speech) must bewell-reproduced. Understanding how the percept of loudness is formed in the auditory system andhow it is coded is therefore of great importance.This special issue includes nine articles on loudness, mainly using psychoacoustical approaches,and ranging from theoretical issues to clinical applications. The issue explores psychophysics,loudness measurement, multisensory integration, the influence of the temporal and frequencycharacteristics of sounds on loudness, the way that loudness is combined across the two ears, andclinical applications to hearing aids and cochlear implants.The article by Zeng presents a unified theory of psychophysical laws in auditory intensityperception. There has been a long history of psychophysical laws that attempt to relate the physicalsound intensity of a stimulus to its perceived magnitude or loudness. The first approach waspublished by Fechner in 1860, who used just noticeable differences to infer that loudness is alogarithmic function of sound intensity. Over the years, Fechner’s original assumption has beencriticized andmodified and a widely accepted view is that loudness is a compressive power functionof sound intensity; this relationship is sometimes called Steven’s power law. In this paper, Zengreviews previous theories based on just noticeable differences and integrates them in a new unifiedtheory, thereby also showing the validity of Fechner’s original idea for a range of hearing situations.The measurement of loudness is discussed in two articles. The article by Fultz et al. dealswith categorical loudness scaling, a procedure that is often used for measuring the growth ofloudness with increasing stimulus intensity. Some authors have proposed that categorical loudnessscaling should be used in the fitting of hearing aids, but this requires time-efficient tests. Aimingto make categorical loudness scaling more efficient, this article describes a comparison of a“traditional” method using fixed stimulus levels with a method using Bayesian inference to selectstimulus parameters that yield the maximum expected information gain during data collection.The article discusses methods for decreasing the test time, while maintaining test-retest reliabilityand accuracy, and it further discusses optimizations. In their study on the moment-by-momentMeunier et al. Editorial: Loudness: From Neuroscience to Perceptionloudness assessment of time-varying sounds, Schlittenlacher andEllermeier used continuous cross-modality matching betweenline length and loudness (and vice versa) for musical excerptsof either rock or classical music. They found that line lengthis highly correlated with long-term loudness calculated usingthe time-varying loudness (TVL) model of loudness (Mooreet al., 2018), showing the reliability of the method. Their resultsprovide some support for the time constant (temporal portionsof the sound that affect momentary judgment) of 750ms usedin the TVL model. As expected, because of the regressioneffect, the line-length adjustment task yielded an exponentof the loudness function smaller than predicted by Steven’spower law.The article by Fischenich et al. explores spectro-temporalprocesses that influence loudness. Using the correlations betweenloudness judgments and the levels of brief temporal segmentswithin longer sounds, they show that temporal weights inloudness judgments are frequency specific. This result suggeststhat temporal integration precedes spectral integration. Thisis consistent with the most recent version of the TVL modelof loudness (Moore et al., 2016, 2018) and with recentneurophysiological data (Thwaites et al., 2017).Two papers deal with the way that loudness combines acrossears, often referred to as binaural loudness. In one paper,Denk et al. explore the “missing 6 dB” (the often-reportedbut sometimes disputed claim that a sound presented viaheadphones needs to have a 6 dB higher level at the eardrumthan the same sound presented via a loudspeaker in order toelicit the same loudness). In a task where the listener adjustedthe level of the sound presented via headphones to matchthe loudness of the same sound presented via a loudspeaker,they found that this mismatch was large at low frequenciesbut largely disappeared at high frequencies. The mismatchdecreased when the interaural coherence (a measure of thecorrelation of the sound across the two ears) decreased, i.e.,when the sound appeared to be more diffuse. Surprisingly, themismatch was different in two different anechoic rooms whereasthere was no difference between two non-anechoic rooms.Thus, the different results found in the literature concerningthe “missing 6 dB” may be related to differences in theexperimental conditions (reproduction mode, room, stimuli).The paper of Pieper et al. is concerned with IndividualizedLoudness Models (ILMs), which might help in the fittingof hearing aids in order to improve audibility, comfort andnaturalness. Loudness models applied to impaired hearingtake into account individual frequency-dependent reductions ofcochlear gain and compression produced by hearing loss. Pieperet al. argue that, in addition, ILMs should take into accountindividual differences in binaural loudness summation. Theypropose an extension of a monaural loudness model “towardan individual binaural loudness model for hearing aid fittingand development.”The paper by McKay describes the application of threeloudness models to the perception of loudness by peoplewith cochlear implants. One model is applied in the simplecase of electrical stimuli applied to a single electrode. Inthis model, cochlear neural excitation is integrated over timeusing a central temporal integration window similar to thatused in models of loudness for normal hearing, such as theTVL model. The other more complex model (the “Detailed”model) is applied when multiple electrodes are stimulatedwithin a short time interval. This model includes the effects ofinteraction between different electrodes. McKay also presentsa “Practical” model, which is a simplified version of the“Detailed” model, and which can be used to predict theloudness of pulsatile electrical stimuli applied to multipleelectrodes. The models have been applied to the developmentof novel signal processing strategies that aim to provideusers of cochlear implants with a more natural perceptionof loudness.In the paper by Sun et al., the authors use bothbehavioral experiments and electro-encephalography (EEG)to measure subtle multi-modal effects in loudness perception.Specifically, in four behavioral and EEG experiments, theauthors show that visual-motor information from manualgestures modulates the loudness perception of consecutivesounds whose intensity changes, as well as the earlyauditory neural responses that correspond to the changesin loudness perception.The paper by Berthomieu et al. describes mounting evidencethat the loudness of sounds is influenced not only by theirphysical characteristics at the eardrum (intensity, spectrumtemporal pattern, and binaural differences) but also by themanner of presentation, for example whether or not thesound source is visible, whether the sounds are presented viaheadphones or loudspeakers, or from “live” sources, such as aperson talking, and whether or not the sounds are meaningful.Berthomieu et al. argue that loudness appears to depend on howlisteners interpret the sound sources, notably whether they focuson the sound that reaches their ears (the proximal stimulus)or the sound as produced by the source (the distal stimulus).This distinction was made many years ago by Helmholtz whostated “...we are exceedingly well-trained in finding out by oursensations the objective nature of the objects around us, butwe are completely unskilled in observing these sensations perse” [quoted in Warren (1981)]. Berthomieu et al. argue thatwhether the listener focusses on the proximal or distal stimulusdepends on the instruction to the listener and on how the soundis interpreted. Many experiments on loudness perception havebeen set up so as to promote listening to the proximal stimulus,whereas in everyday life loudness may be more related to thedistal stimulus.AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONSAll authors listed have made a substantial, direct andintellectual contribution to the work, and approved itfor publication.FUNDINGBM was supported by the Engineering and Physical SciencesResearch Council (UK, Grant Number RG78536).Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 November 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 785093Meunier et al. Editorial: Loudness: From Neuroscience to PerceptionREFERENCESMoore, B. C. J., Glasberg, B. R., Varathanathan, A., and Schlittenlacher,J. (2016). A loudness model for time-varying sounds incorporatingbinaural inhibition. Trends Hear. 20, 1–16. doi: 10.1177/2331216516682698Moore, B. C. J., Jervis, M., Harries, L., and Schlittenlacher, J. (2018). Testingand refining a loudness model for time-varying sounds incorporatingbinaural inhibition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143, 1504–1513. doi: 10.1121/1.5027246Thwaites, A., Schlittenlacher, J., Nimmo-Smith, I., Marslen-Wilson, W. D.,and Moore, B. C. J. (2017). Tonotopic representation of loudness inthe human cortex. Hear. Res. 344, 244–254. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2016.11.015Warren, R. M. (1981). Measurement of sensory intensity.Behav. Brian Sci. 4, 175–189. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00008256Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in theabsence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as apotential conflict of interest.Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authorsand do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those ofthe publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated inthis article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed orendorsed by the publisher.Copyright © 2021 Meunier, Van Eeckhoutte and Moore. This is an open-accessarticle distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCBY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, providedthe original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the originalpublication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with theseterms.Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 November 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 785093

Editorial: Loudness: From Neuroscience to Perception

van Eeckhoutte, Maaike

Moore, Brian, C J

HAL AMU

Moore, Brian C.J.

Online Research Database In Technology

Editorial:Loudness: From Neuroscience to Perception

http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.785093

Editorial: Loudness: From Neuroscience to Perception

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Apollo (Cambridge)

HAL AMU

Online Research Database In Technology