Examination of a linear model in an informational masking study

When multitone maskers are used in a two-interval, forced choice experiment, the amount of masking is larger when the masker is randomly chosen on each presentation interval compared to on each trial (the same masker in the two listening intervals). These conditions are referred to as having within- versus between-trial randomization. If it is assumed that an observer's ultimate detection decision depends on a single decision variable (DV), it is probable that the DV's variance will be substantially larger in the within-trial randomization condition compared to the between-trial randomization condition. The goal of the current experiment is to evaluate the degree to which this stimulus-based change in DV variance can account for the difference in thresholds in the within-versus between-trial randomization conditions. Thresholds are measured for the detection of a tone added to a six-component masker in between- and within-trial randomization conditions. The slopes of the psychometric functions provide an estimate of the variance in the DV for the between- and within-trial randomization conditions. Additionally, a channel model is fitted to the psychophysical results in the within-trial randomization condition. The resulting model is then used to predict the value of the DV for each trial, and ultimately to estimate the proportion of the total variance in the within-trial randomization condition that is attributable to changes in maskers across intervals. The variance of the DV in the between-trial randomization condition accounted for approximately 65% of the total variance in the DV in the within-trial randomization condition. Stimulus-based interval-by-interval masker randomization accounted for approximately 20% of the total variance of the within-trial randomization DV. The remaining 15% of the DV variance in the within-trial randomization condition remained unaccounted for. This result is fairly stable whether the maskers are drawn from a small versus large pool of potential maskers. (C) 2003 Acoustical Society of America.