Javascript is disabled or not supported in your browser. JavaScript must be enabled in order for you to use WIKINDX fully. Enable JavaScript through your browser options then try again, otherwise, try using a different browser.

Sound Research WIKINDX

List Resources

Displaying 1 - 5 of 5

Bussemakers, M. P., & de Haan, A. 1998, November 1–4. Using earcons and icons in categorisation tasks to improve multimedia interfaces. Paper presented at 5^th International Conference on Auditory Display.
Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 23/02/2006, 13:18
"Earcons are abstract, i.e. not event or object related, musical sounds."
"...processing of auditory information is about 40-60ms faster than the processing of visual information..."
State that music is "an interpretative co-message" in film and that image and music are automatically blended to produce a "distinct emotional tone."
Some results: When users are asked to categorise [visual] images, responses are quicker when the image is presented alone than when a simultaneous and corresponding auditory icon or earcon is used. When users were asked to categorise audio images/sounds, having a simultaneous and corresponding visual image speeded up response times.
Unlike Blattner et. al., the authors place the former's 'representational earcons' using recording of sound in an 'auditory icon' class that is distinct to that of earcons (Blattner, Sumikawa, & Greenberg 1989, p.21). For the authors, earcons are purely musical and abstract.
Reiterate that the onus is on the perceiver to create a perceptual unity leading to an unequivocal interpretation when presented simultaneous multimodal stimuli (e.g. image and sound).
Familant, M. E., & Detweiler, M. C. (1993). Iconic reference: Evolving perspectives and an organizing framework. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39(5), 705–728.
Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 24/08/2005, 14:22
Contains a critique of other iconic taxonomies including Gaver and Blattner et al. (Gaver 1986; Blattner, Sumikawa, & Greenberg 1989). The suggestion is that they fail in distinguishing between sign and referent relations. The authors propose a taxonomy including: Direct reference: Signal ----> Sign Referent/Denotative Referent (identical referents). Indirect reference: Signal ---->Sign Referent ----> Denotative Referent. The referent relation (between Sign and Denotative referents) can be: Part-part: S and D share a subset of features. Part-whole: all the features of S are a subset of D. Whole-part: all the features of D are a subset of S. Identical: S and D have the same set features. Disjoint: S and D have no features in common. based on commonalities (or not) between feature sets of S and D. The most common signs are part-part and part-whole.
Some discussion of the use of the term 'icon' in semiotic terms and in general (computer) usage.
Gaver, W. W. (1986). Auditory icons: Using sound in computer interfaces. Human-computer Interaction, 2, 167–177.
Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 08/01/2008, 07:51
Manipulating parameters of the sound itself such as pitch and loudness (what are termed proximal stimuli), forces mappings between data and representation "to be either arbitrary or, at best, metaphorical. A nomic mapping can only be produced by manipulating the sound in terms of its source -- by using natural sounds." Although such sounds may of course be symbolic or metaphorical, "natural sounds should make possible a higher degree of articulatory directness than manipulating dimensions of the sound itself."
"...Wagner's "Leitmotifs" and the use of sound in video games such as Pac Man, use metaphors based on similarities between the temporal progressions of the sounds and the events they are to represent. Other examples, such as the use of changing pitch to stand for changing heights, involve the use of a dimensional metaphor, in which one ordered dimension is used to represent another."
Metonymic auditory icons are those "in which a feature is used to represent the whole"
"Auditory icons provide a natural and intuitive way to represent dimensional data and to represent conceptual objects in a computer system."
"an auditory icon is a sound that provides information about an event that represents desired data. Instead of using dimensions of sound to stand for dimensions of the data, dimensions of the sound's source are used"
Having suggested that nomic sounds have greater articulatory directness than symbolic, Gavin warns that culturally-ingrained symbolic sounds are just as powerfully representative and should not be discarded as useless.
Discusses the notion of articulatory directness which is the continuum on which symbolic (least), metaphoric and nomic (most) stand.
Gaver identifies three mappings between data and its representation which he applies to sound: symbolic -- arbitrary mapping Metaphoric -- similarities between data and representation which may be structure-mapped (structural similarities) or metonymic. Nomic -- direct relationship between representation of the sound source and sound. Gavin terms these types of sound auditory icons.
Keller, P., & Stevens, C. (2004). Meaning from environmental sounds: Types of signal-referent relations and their effect on recognizing auditory icons. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10(1), 3–12.
Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 14/10/2008, 00:11
The results of their experiments indicate that auditory icons "may outperform abstract sounds such as earcons" in contrast to Blattner et. al.'.'s assertions (Blattner, Sumikawa, & Greenberg 1989). s assertions (Blattner, Sumikawa, & Greenberg 1989).
The "predisposition to find meaning effectively widens the potential database of sounds that can be used as auditory warnings."
Experimental results showed "that there is no significant difference in recognition accuracy or speed of response to ecological versus metaphorical relations."
The authors adapt a taxonomy of visual icon signal-referents from Familant (1993) & Detweiler for use with auditory icons. A direct reference "indicates a signal referent relation in which there is only one referent involved, the denotative referent (e.g., machine gun fire sound for firing machine gun) ... Indirect reference occurs when there are at least two referents. Typically the signal refers to the denotative referent through an intermediate sign referent ... An example from the auditory domain would be use of the sound of rattling trash cans--the sign referent--to signal that a computer file has been successfully deleted--the denotative referent."
Kramer, G. (1994). Some organizing principles for representing data with sound. In G. Kramer (Ed), Auditory Display: Sonification, Audification, and Auditory Interfaces. (pp. 185–221). Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 21/10/2005, 14:49
Defines audification: "A direct translation of a data waveform to the audible domain for purposes of monitoring and comprehension". As it is a direct translation, the data must exist in the form of a waveform (it is shifted to the audio domain) and no sound-generators are involved. Sometimes referred to as 0th-order sonification.
Sonification is defined as "[T]he use of data to control a sound generator for the purpose of monitoring and analysis of the data". This involves mapping of one or more parameters of the data set to the audio domain e.g. size ---> loudness.
Audiation is the formation of "an imagined auditory image" and involves memory and recall. Little research has been done in this area. Sometimes called auralization, which itself is sometimes described as realistic sonic spatialization.
"When a complex multivariate auditory stream is used to convey data, an important perceptual process comes into play. In addition to the system user's ability to scan his or her attention through the sound, relationships between variables and entire system states are perceived "at a glance." Which is to say, without attention-directed effort, all the auditory variables are perceived as a whole, or a "gestalt."
Provides two categories of human-computer interface sound: Realistic -- may be recorded or designed/synthesised to emulate 'real-world' sounds. Kramer includes natural sounds, animals, speech, machinery in this category. Abstract -- no obvious associations with 'real-world' sound. Includes Blattner's (1989) earcons, non-imitative synthetic sounds and acoustic musical instruments.
Discusses the use of metaphor to link abstract sounds to data sets where, for sonification purposes, no realistic sounds are available (e.g. stock market sonifications). When sonifying 'more' and 'less', metaphorical associations for 'more' might be: louder (larger objects, more sensory impact) brighter (more partials or more high-frequency energy) faster (more sound in the same time frame) higher pitch (more cycles per second) Affective associations relate to the feelings aroused by sound. For example desirable and undesirable qualities in the sonified data set may be mapped to sound ugliness, richness, in-tune/out of tune etc. There may be some interaction between metaphorical and affective mappings and subjectivity plays its part.