Re: Cariani's question: "What is the visual analogue of pitch?" (John Neuhoff )


Subject: Re: Cariani's question: "What is the visual analogue of pitch?"
From:    John Neuhoff  <jneuhoff(at)WOOSTER.EDU>
Date:    Tue, 20 Jan 2004 07:37:55 -0500

Stephen Handel once said that an analogy between vision and audition could be "seductive, but misleading". In my opinion, Kubovy & Van Valkenburg's "Pitch is to space as audition is to vision" idea has some serious drawbacks. See my comment on their paper: Neuhoff, J. G. (2003) Pitch variation is unnecessary (and sometimes insufficient) for the formation of auditory objects. Cognition. 87 (3) 219-224. Available here: http://jneuhoff.com/Cognition_Comment.pdf ________________________________ John G. Neuhoff Department of Psychology The College of Wooster Wooster, OH 44691 Phone: 330-263-2475 Fax: 928-244-5577 http://jneuhoff.com ************************ "Ecological Psychoacoustics" from Academic Press June, 2004 http://www.jneuhoff.com/ecopsyc.htm ************************************ > -----Original Message----- > From: AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception > [mailto:AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA] On Behalf Of Michael Kubovy > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 6:02 AM > To: AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA > Subject: Re: Cariani's question: "What is the visual analogue > of pitch?" > > Dave van Valkenburg and I have addressed Peter Cariani's question > ("what is the visual analogue of pitch?") at some length in > an article, > Kubovy, M. & Van Valkenburg, D. Auditory and visual objects. > Cognition. > 80(1-2):97-126, 2001 Jun, which can be downloaded from: > ( > http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mk9y/mySite/papers/ > 2001.Cognition.v80(1%0A-2).pdf ). > > Our answer is that the question cannot be answered without > distinguishing between different kinds of analogues. Insofar > as pitch > is central to the auditory "what", then the analogue is whatever > sustains the visual "what", namely either space or spatial frequency > (we focus on space in the article, but there's little reason to > privilege either it or spatial frequency -- the analogy is at > a level > where sensory mechanisms are not at issue).


This message came from the mail archive
http://www.auditory.org/postings/2004/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University