Listen to this short audio clip:
Being able to separate relevant information from background noise is a complex task (just how difficult is also revealed by our most recent Casual Friday study -- if you haven't participated yet, you've still got time -- click here to try it). As we get older, the task becomes more and more difficult. But how well can babies separate backround noise from relevant information?
Rochelle Newman developed these recordings to assess infants' ability to stream speech: to distinguish relevant language from irrelevant noise. The ability to stream is likely critical to language learning -- studies have found that more than two thirds of all parents of infants report that other household members were "frequently" talking while they spoke to their babies. Add to this other noises and distractions in a typical house -- TV, pets, appliances -- and it may seem a wonder that babies can learn to talk at all.
So how well do infants stream? Newman played four recordings to 5-month-old infants, all of them like the first sample you heard above, with the baby's name being spoken 10 dB louder than the background noise. One of the recordings played the child's name, one played a different name with the same syllable stress, and the other two played completely different names. A light came on next to the speaker where the recording came from, and an independent observer recorded how long the babies looked at the light. Here are the results:
The babies looked at the light significantly longer when their own name was spoken. But when the difference was reduced to 5 dB, the results were markedly different:
Now there was no significant difference in looking time, even between the infants' own name and the non-stress-matched names. With just a 5-dB change in the level of the voice calling its name, the baby is unable to distinguish it from any other name. Newman repeated the task with 9-month-olds, and the results were the same. Only when she tested 13-month-old infants was Newman able to show that babies could reliably distinguish their name being called when it was 5 dB louder than the background noise.
Interestingly, 13 months is also the age when most infants begin to talk -- perhaps there is a connection.
Newman, R.S. (2005). The cocktail party effect in infants revisited: Listening to one's name in noise. Developmental Psychology, 41(2), 352-362.
- Log in to post comments
Thanks to a few stacked DSP/effect plugins I had going in Winamp, both voices saying "Caroline" were crystal clear. Additionally, I noticed many significant differences in the inflection of each iteration of "Caroline."
They're crystal clear on my mac with no plugins. What's amazing to me is that babies can't hear it.
Both crystal clear but i'm wearing headphone.
Alain
Ah, Greta has pointed out the difference to me. The voice says "Caroline" at the same volume in each clip. But in the second clip, the background voices are noticably louder -- that's how the 5 dB difference is attained.
FWIW, my immediate impression was that the "Caroline"s in the second clip were less loud relative to the BG noise. I could still make them out but they were less punchy.
Of course I had reason to expect there was going to be something about the audio, and I do have a background in video and sound editing, so one could argue I'm prone to both bias and marginally increased sensitivity...
I've always had a problem with that, and I first noticed it as a kid in noisy cafeterias. Going to bars with a group of friends is always a bit of a problem - I'm the one cupping my ears to hear a particular person, and everyone else seems to have no trouble picking out each voice. And my ears are fine - I've had them checked a few times. Something not right in the brain wiring, I suppose.
The first one was louder and crisper; more clear. The second was muddled just a tad for me.