Perception of object length by sound
Abstract
Although hearing is classically considered a temporal sense, everyday listening suggests that subtle spatial properties constitute an important part of what people know about the world through sound. Typically neglected in psychoacoustics research, the ability to perceive the precise sizes of objects on the basis of sound was investigated during the routine event of dropping wooden dowels of different lengths onto a hard surface. In two experiments, the ordinal and metrical success of naive listeners was related to length but not to the simple acoustic variables (duration, amplitude, frequency) likely to be related to it. Additional analysis suggests the potential relevance of an object's inertia tensor in constraining perception of that object's length, analogous to the case that has been made for perceiving length by effortful touch.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Human direction hearing is a naturally integrated sense requiring less training to perceive spatial information accurately.
“In contrast, human direction hearing is a naturally integrated sense requiring less training to perceive spatial information accurately [17–19].”
From An investigation into the effectiveness of using acoustic touch to assist people who are blind (2023) · cites this paper as [17]
Humans can recover physical properties from objects causing sound themselves, such as dimensions, shape, or material.
“Other psychophysical research shows that humans can recover physical properties from objects causing sound themselves, such as dimensions (Carello, Anderson, & Kunkler-Peck, 1998; Lakatos, McAdams, & Caussá, 1997; Houben, Kohlrausch, & Hermes, 2004), shape (Kunkler-Peck & Turvey, 2000; Grassi, 2005), or material (Klatzky, Pai, & Krotkov, 2000; Giordano & McAdams, 2006).”
From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Carello, Anderson, & Kunkler-Peck, 1998
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review
Spence, C. (2011) · Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/s13414-010-0073-7 · Cited by 1,618 · see citing works
Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1
Kristjánsson, Á., Moldoveanu, A., Jóhannesson, Ó. I., Balan, O., Spagnol, S., Valgeirsdóttir, V. V., & Unnthorsson, R. (2016) · Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience · doi:10.3233/rnn-160647 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
An investigation into the effectiveness of using acoustic touch to assist people who are blind
Zhu, H. Y., Hossain, S. N., Jin, C., Singh, A. K., Nguyen, M. T. D., Deverell, L., Nguyen, V., Gates, F. S., Fernandez, I. G., Melencio, M. V., et al. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290431 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Carello, C., Anderson, K. L., & Kunkler-Peck, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Connecticut (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1998-05
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 211-214
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2168674307
- Cited by
- 153
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 1.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Keywords
- inertia tensor, auditory spatial cues
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review