Re: sex differences in perception of environmental sounds (Milena Droumeva )


Subject: Re: sex differences in perception of environmental sounds
From:    Milena Droumeva  <mvdroume@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Tue, 18 May 2010 10:30:13 -0700
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

--00032555a252a7cfc90486e1b1a7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, rather than having some hard evidence to offer, I see this important discussion as a way to keep the conversation going and wanted to just express an opinion on the definition of "environmental sounds" and other confounding factors about the perception of environmental sounds that I believe defy a bit direct comparisons of basic human differences such as sex, even age, etc. My familiarity and work with environmental sounds comes from some years of work as a sound designer and auditory display designer where I've taken "environmental sounds" and used them as basis for designing informational displays, as well as continuous feedback. I also have a background in acoustic ecology of the R.M. Schafer kind (if any of you are familiar) I have to admit I am surprised to learn that in the psychology area there i= s an established definition of environmental sounds, given - and here is my "opinion" point - the highly culturally defined and specific nature of environmental sound perception. The example of baby crying is just too easy to pick on, but I will anyway - it could be argued that this is a highly particular sound, laden with cultural meaning and habituation. Before it ca= n be reduced to sex differences, must we not recognize that not only parents vs. non-parents would naturally have an elevated sensitivity to it, as it i= s meaningful, but also women, even non-parents - get socialized in almost every culture - to think of themselves as potential mothers, and thus might= , again, be more sensitive to a sound of baby crying. To me, this does not imply biology and primary psychology (that is, sex differences in perception) - it implies cultural habituation. This can be said for many, seemingly "innocent" and everyday/familiar environmental sounds - and I am curios, based on this discussion - are any of these other confounding factors (pesky cultural ones) being taken into account in any way in the psychoacoustic field? Further - is any difference being made in the definition of environmental sounds between human, mechanical, electronic, electroacoustic and digital sound? Thank you for entertaining my concerns - I just think this is a really important discussion to have here! Milena On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Brian Gygi <bgygi@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > David, > > Although no formal body has ruled on the topic, in the past several years > the term "environmental sounds" has acquired a relatively stable definiti= on > - namely familiar, naturally occurring sounds that refer to physical > sources in the environment. There is of course some ambiguity regarding > precisely what fits into this category, i.e., do musical instruments coun= t, > whose primary function is acoustic conveyance of aesthetic attributes rat= her > than sound source specification? In any case,tThis is the definition I a= nd > others have taken in our work and what I assume Joanna meant. If not I h= ope > she will let us know. > > > Brian Gygi, Ph.D. > Speech and Hearing Research > Veterans Affairs Northern California Health Care System > 150 Muir Road > Martinez, CA 94553 > (925) 372-2000 x5653 > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* David Mountain [mailto:dcm@xxxxxxxx > *Sent:* Monday, May 17, 2010 08:06 PM > *To:* AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx > *Subject:* Re: sex differences in perception of environmental sounds > > I think that before we can address this question, we need to define what = we > mean by "environmental sounds." > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:47 AM, valeriy shafiro <firosha@xxxxxxxx>wrot= e: > >> Dear Joanna, >> >> As far as I know across the studies of environmental sound perception >> in the last 20-30 years none was designed specifically to examine >> male/female differences. Results from studies that looked at >> identification of large collections of different types of >> environmental sounds also did not find any differences, although in a >> recent study on environmental sound identification within contextually >> congruent and incongruent auditory scenes, Brian Gygi and I, saw an >> overall identification difference between males and females, but it >> was small (3-4 points) and non significant. It is conceivable that >> given a large variety of familiar environmental sounds tested in these >> studies, whatever differences there may be between males and females >> are obscured, and that for a set of specific sounds there are may be >> sex differeces in behavioral of physiologic measures (e.g. baby >> crying). While not specifically targeting environmental sounds, John >> Neuhoff did find some interesting sex differences in the perception of >> looming motion, which might relevant to your question. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Valeriy >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Joanna Kantor-Martynuska >> <joanna.kantor@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Dear Auditory List, >> > >> > I would very much appreciate your suggestions about the literature >> regarding >> > sex differences in perception of environmental sounds. I=92m intrested= in >> > physiological indices of auditory predispositions for perception of >> > different sounds we encounter in our natural environment. >> > >> > Looking forward to any interesting suggestions or links. >> > >> > Best, >> > Joanna Kantor >> > > > > -- > > David C. Mountain, Ph.D. > Professor of Biomedical Engineering > > Boston University > 44 Cummington St. > Boston, MA 02215 > > Email: dcm@xxxxxxxx > Website: http://www.bu.edu/hrc/research/laboratories/auditory-biophysics/ > Phone: (617) 353-4343 > FAX: (617) 353-6766 > Office: ERB 413 > > --00032555a252a7cfc90486e1b1a7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all,=A0<div><br></div><div>rather than having some hard evidence to of= fer, I see this important discussion as a way to keep the conversation goin= g and wanted to just express an opinion on the definition of &quot;environm= ental sounds&quot; and other confounding factors about the perception of en= vironmental sounds that I believe defy a bit direct comparisons of basic hu= man differences such as sex, even age, etc.=A0</div> <div><br></div><div>My familiarity and work with environmental sounds comes= from some years of work as a sound designer and auditory display designer = where I&#39;ve taken &quot;environmental sounds&quot; and used them as basi= s for designing informational displays, as well as continuous feedback. I a= lso have a background in acoustic ecology of the R.M. Schafer kind (if any = of you are familiar)</div> <div><br></div><div>I have to admit I am surprised to learn that in the psy= chology area there is an established definition of environmental sounds, gi= ven - and here is my &quot;opinion&quot; point - the highly culturally defi= ned and specific nature of environmental sound perception. The example of b= aby crying is just too easy to pick on, but I will anyway - it could be arg= ued that this is a highly particular sound, laden with cultural meaning and= habituation. Before it can be reduced to sex differences, must we not reco= gnize that not only parents vs. non-parents would naturally have an elevate= d sensitivity to it, as it is meaningful, but also women, even non-parents = - get socialized in almost every culture - to think of themselves as potent= ial mothers, and thus might, again, be more sensitive to a sound of baby cr= ying. To me, this does not imply biology and primary psychology (that is, s= ex differences in perception) - it implies cultural habituation.=A0</div> <div><br></div><div>This can be said for many, seemingly &quot;innocent&quo= t; and everyday/familiar environmental sounds - and I am curios, based on t= his discussion - are any of these other confounding factors (pesky cultural= ones) being taken into account in any way in the psychoacoustic field?</di= v> <div><br></div><div>Further - is any difference being made in the definitio= n of environmental sounds between human, mechanical, electronic, electroaco= ustic and digital sound?</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you for entertainin= g my concerns - I just think this is a really important discussion to have = here!</div> <div><br></div><div>Milena<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, May 17= , 2010 at 11:11 PM, Brian Gygi <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bgyg= i@xxxxxxxx">bgygi@xxxxxxxx</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"= gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-= left:1ex;"> <div><span style=3D"font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><font face=3D"Ve= rdana" size=3D"2">David,</font></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:small"><= br></span></div><div><font face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2">Although no formal b= ody has ruled on the topic, in the past several years the term &quot;enviro= nmental sounds&quot; has acquired a relatively stable definition - namely f= amiliar, naturally occurring sounds that refer to =A0physical sources in th= e environment. =A0There is of course some ambiguity regarding precisely wha= t fits into this category, i.e., do musical instruments count, whose primar= y function is acoustic conveyance of aesthetic attributes rather than sound= source specification? =A0In any case,tThis is the definition I and others = have taken in our work and what I assume Joanna meant. =A0If not I hope she= will let us know.</font></div> <div class=3D"im"><div><span style=3D"font-size:small"><br></span></div><di= v><font face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2">=A0</font></div>Brian Gygi, Ph.D.<br>Sp= eech and Hearing Research<br>Veterans Affairs Northern California Health Ca= re System<br> 150 Muir Road<br>Martinez, CA 94553<br>(925) 372-2000 x5653<div><font face= =3D"Verdana" color=3D"#0000ff" size=3D"2"></font>=A0</div></div><blockquote= style=3D"padding-left:5px;margin-left:5px;border-left:#0000ff 2px solid;ma= rgin-right:0px"> <font face=3D"Tahoma" size=3D"2"><div class=3D"im">-----Original Message---= --<br><b>From:</b> David Mountain [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dcm@xxxxxxxx" tar= get=3D"_blank">dcm@xxxxxxxx</a>]<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 17, 2010 08:06 P= M<br><b>To:</b> <a href=3D"mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blan= k">AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx</a><br> </div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><b>Subject:</b> Re: sex differences= in perception of environmental sounds<br><br></div></div></font><div><div>= </div><div class=3D"h5">I think that before we can address this question, w= e need to define what we mean by &quot;environmental sounds.&quot;<br> <br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:47 AM, valeriy sh= afiro <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:firosha@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"= _blank">firosha@xxxxxxxx</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gma= il_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-lef= t:1ex"> Dear Joanna,<br><br>As far as I know across the studies of environmental so= und perception<br>in the last 20-30 years none was designed specifically to= examine<br>male/female differences. =A0Results from studies that looked at= <br> identification of large collections of different types of<br>environmental = sounds also did not find any differences, although in a<br>recent study on = environmental sound identification within contextually<br>congruent and inc= ongruent auditory scenes, Brian Gygi and I, saw an<br> overall identification difference between males and females, but it<br>was = small (3-4 points) and non significant. =A0It is conceivable that<br>given = a large variety of familiar environmental sounds tested in these<br>studies= , whatever differences there may be between males and females<br> are obscured, and that for a set of specific sounds there are may be<br>sex= differeces in behavioral of physiologic measures (e.g. baby<br>crying). = =A0While not specifically targeting environmental sounds, John<br>Neuhoff d= id find some interesting sex differences in the perception of<br> looming motion, which might relevant to your question.<br><br>Best regards,= <br><br>Valeriy<br><br>On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Joanna Kantor-Marty= nuska<br>&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:joanna.kantor@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank"= >joanna.kantor@xxxxxxxx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; Dear Auditory List,<br>&gt;<br>&gt; I would very much appreciate your = suggestions about the literature regarding<br>&gt; sex differences in perce= ption of environmental sounds. I=92m intrested in<br>&gt; physiological ind= ices of auditory predispositions for perception of<br> &gt; different sounds we encounter in our natural environment.<br>&gt;<br>&= gt; Looking forward to any interesting suggestions or links.<br>&gt;<br>&gt= ; Best,<br>&gt; Joanna Kantor<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"> <br>-- <br><br>David C. Mountain, Ph.D.<br>Professor of Biomedical Engineer= ing<br><br>Boston University<br>44 Cummington St.<br>Boston, MA 02215<br><b= r>Email: =A0 <a href=3D"mailto:dcm@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">dcm@xxxxxxxx</a>= <br> Website: <a href=3D"http://www.bu.edu/hrc/research/laboratories/auditory-bi= ophysics/" target=3D"_blank">http://www.bu.edu/hrc/research/laboratories/au= ditory-biophysics/</a><br>Phone: =A0 (617) 353-4343<br>FAX: =A0 =A0 (617) 3= 53-6766<br> Office: =A0ERB 413<br><br></div></div></blockquote> </blockquote></div><br></div> --00032555a252a7cfc90486e1b1a7--


This message came from the mail archive
/home/empire6/dpwe/public_html/postings/2010/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University