Direct and Indirect Listening Test Methods—A Discussion Based on Audio-Visual Spatial Coherence Experiments

Pike C, Stenzel H. Direct and Indirect Listening Test Methods—A Discussion Based on Audio-Visual Spatial Coherence Experiments. In: AES Convention 143. Audio Engineering Society; 2017. Paper 9829. Available from: https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=19226

@inproceedings{Pike2017_19226,
  author = {Pike, Cleopatra and Stenzel, Hanne},
  title = {{Direct and Indirect Listening Test Methods—A Discussion Based on Audio-Visual Spatial Coherence Experiments}},
  booktitle = {AES Convention 143},
  note = {Paper 9829},
  year = {2017},
  month = oct,
  publisher = {Audio Engineering Society},
  url = {https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=19226}
}

TY  - CPAPER
TI  - Direct and Indirect Listening Test Methods—A Discussion Based on Audio-Visual Spatial Coherence Experiments
AU  - Pike, Cleopatra
AU  - Stenzel, Hanne
T2  - AES Convention 143
M1  - Paper 9829
PY  - 2017
DA  - 2017/10/06
UR  - https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=19226
PB  - Audio Engineering Society
LA  - en
AB  - This paper reviews the pros and cons of using direct measures (e.g. preference, annoyance) and indirect measures (e.g. “subconscious” EEG measures and reaction times, “RTs”) to determine how viewers perceive audio and audio-visual attributes. The methodologies are discussed in relation to spatial coherence testing (whether audio/visual signals arrive from the same direction). Experimental results in coherence testing are described to illustrate problems with direct measures and improvements seen with RTs. Suggestions are made for the use of indirect measures in testing, including more sophisticated uses of RTs. It is concluded that indirect measures offer novel insights into listener evaluations of audio-visual experiences but are not always suitable
ER  -