Semantic Approach to the Perception of Complex Sounds

Lawrence N. Solomon

Citation: 30, 421 (1958); doi: 10.1121/1.1909632

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1909632
View Table of Contents: http://asa.scitation.org/toc/jas/30/5
Published by the Acoustical Society of America
THE JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA VOLUME 30, NUMBER 5 MAY, 1958

Semantic Approach to the Perception of Complex Sounds

LAWRENCE N. SOLOMON
U.S. Navy tlectronicsLaboratory,San Diego52, California
(ReceivedDecember18, 1957)

In an attempt to derive a limited number of descriptiveadjectives with which to characterizepassive

sonarsounds,50 U.S. Navy sonarmen(median sonar experienceof one year) rated 20 different passive
sonarsoundson 50 seven-pointscalesdefinedby polar-oppositeadjectives (e.g., heavy-light). The inter-
correlationsbetweenscales(calculatedover both subjectsand sounds)werefactor analyzedby the Thurstone
completecentroidmethod.Seveninterpretableorthogonalfactors (accountingfor approximately40% of
the variance of judgments) were extracted from the data.
The generality of the methodologyfor psychologicalresearchon auditory perceptionis consideredand
suggestions for researchalong theselinesare presented.

INTRODUCTION
HE problem
tion of
has long the
beendimensionsofauditory
one of considerable percep-
interest to
researchers in the field of audition. Pitch and loudness
emergedrelativelyearly aspromisingunitary functions
in this domain, but other dimensions,such as volume,
brightness,and density evadedclear-cutspecification.
Today, Harris and others have thrown somesuspicion
upon the notion that even loudnessand pitch dis-
crimination are unitary in nature and, instead, are
expandingthe study of primary auditory abilitiesinto
a search for subfunctionsamong what were formerly
thought to be unitary realms.
Working with pure tones over thirty years ago,
Rich ' and Halverson a were able to determine the
differential thresholds for tonal volume as functions of
frequencyand intensity. Although there was some
difficultyin replicatingtheseresults,Stevens,
4and later
Thomas,* were able to obtain consistentequal-volume
contours. From these results, volume was established
as a separateattribute of tonal experience,distinct
from pitch and loudness.
Stevens6wasalsoable (still workingwith pure tones)
to determineequal-densityand equal-brightnesscon-
tours,thus seeminglyestablishingtheseexperimentally
as functionsin auditory perception.In 1936, however,
Boringand Stevens 7questioned whetherbrightnessand
densitymight not be differentwordswhichwerebeing
usedto apply to the sameattribute. With this concern,
they helped focus attention upon the languagethe
listenerusedto describehis tonal experiences,and they
set the stage for investigationinto the sematicsof
auditory perception.
Then Lichtea did a seriesof studiesin an attempt to
quantifythe characteristics
of complextoneswhichare
J. D. Harris, Medical ResearchLaboratory Memorandum
Report 57-4 (1957).
'G. J. Rich, Am. J. Psychol.30, 121 (1919).
aH. M. Halverson,Am. J. Psychol.35, 360 (1924).
4 S.S. Stevens,Am. J. Psychol.46, 397 (1934).
5 G. J. Thomas,Am. J. Psychol.62, 182 (1949).
6S.S. Stevens,Proc.Natl. Acad.Sci.U.S. 20, 475 (1934).
?E.G. Boringand S.S. Stevens,Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.
22. 514 (1936).
8William H. Lichte, J. Exptl. Psychol.28, 455 (1940).
421
commonlydenotedby the term timbre. The unsystem-
atic terminologyused by musiciansand acousticiansto
describe their tonal experiencesled Lichte to test
experimentally whether or not complex tones have
identifiable attributes other than pitch and loudness.
He concludedthat complextonesdo possess, in addition
to pitch and loudness,at least three attributes' bright-
ness,roughness,and fullness.
Two years later, in his factorial study of auditory
function,Karlin9identifiedpitch-quality discrimination
as one of the dimensionsin the auditory domain, and
Hanley, in 1956, isolated "unpleasantness"as an
identifiablefactor in the perceptionof speech.
Other than these studies, however, little has been
done to exploresystematicallythe qualitative "mean-
ing" or connotativeaspectof complexsounds.Timbre
continuesto be used as a loose,nonspecificreference
to various qualitative attributes of tonal experiences.
Mosier,n in 1941, carried out an experiment, along
somewhat different lines, closely allied to Lichte's
interest. Mosier was one of the first to attempt a
systematic,psychometricstudy of the meaningof cer-
tain sounds.He had subjectsrate 296 words and word
combinationson an l 1-point scale of favorableness-
unfavorableness.Mosier's technique, however, lacked
the multidimensionalityrequired to do justice to the
polyvariate nature of meaning.
Much the same problem that prompted Lichte's
researchpresenteditself to the presentauthor in 1953.
It was decided to utilize something like Mosier's
techniqueas the methodologymost suited to the task.
The soundsunder study werepassivesonarrecordings,
and the looseand variable terminologywas the "sonar
vocabulary" that sonarmen had spontaneouslyde-
veloped to aid the communicationof their auditory
experiences.
The submarinesonarman,faced with the realities of
underseawarfare, has had to develop his own means
of analyzing sonar signalsand of describingthem to
others.In an informal way, a "sonarvocabulary" has
j.E. Karlin, Psychometrika7, 251 (1942).
Clair N. Hanley, J. SpeechHearing Disorders21, 76 (1956).
C. I. Mosier, J. Soc.Psychol.13, 123 (1941).
422 LAWRENCE
developedamong sonarmen,similar to the looseand
variable vocabulary used by musiciansand psycholo-
gists to describetheir tonal experiences.Accordingto
the sonarman, some soundsare "heavy," others are
"light"; some are "bright," others are "dull"; some
are "hard," others are "soft." The use of such terms
as "heavy," "bright," and "hard" to characterize
sounds seems to be an example of synesthetic or
metaphoricalthinking.
In most studies dealing with the recognition and
detectionof passivesonarsounds,subjectivereactions
to the soundshave beengenerallyignoredas a possible
means of differentiation. However, one must consider
the "frameof reference"of the personor, in otherwords,
take into accountwhat the stimulusmeansto the person.
It is here proposedthat the experiencedsonarman
operateson the basisof a semanticframe of reference
which is incompletelyverbalized.Each sonarstimulus
is evaluated within this frame of referenceand judged
(or discriminatedas) warship, submarine,etc. (For
example, since it has a "heavy" sound, it is a cargo
ship.) It seemsfeasible to structure this frame of
reference explicitly, thus providing a standardized
"ruler" which may aid in the making of sonar judg-
ments. Actually, such a processwould involve the
developmentof severalrulers, and theserulers would
be the dimensions of the frame of reference characteris- summarized,a seriesof 50 seven-pointscaleswas com-
tic of the experiencedsonarman.
The term "dimension" as used here bears a relation-
ship to the Cartesian coordinatesof physical space. the followingsources:(1) a preliminarystudy run on
The term "semantic space," as differentiated from collegestudentswhereinthe subjectswrote as many
physical space, is used to denote the hyperspace descriptivewordsas they felt were applicableto de-
(multidimensionalrealm) which includes the sonar- scribevarioussonarrecordings
man's perceptual reactions to sounds as they are a list of scalesbeingusedby Osgoodand SuciTM
verbalizedin terms of descriptiveadjectives.
METHODOLOGY
The task of structuring the sonarman'sframe of
referencein terms of descriptiveadjectiveshas been
approachedin this study through the use of multi-
dimensionalscaling techniques.By means of these
techniques,it is possibleto determinewhat psychologi-
cal dimensionsthe sonarmanrespondsto when placed
in a complexstimulussituation.Suchstimulussitua-
tions may be scaledalong multidimensionallines by
first assumingthat certain dimensionsare operativein
that particularsituation,moreor less"blanketing"the
possibilities.Then, through factor analysisone may
reducethe numberof dimensionsto a minimal quantity
having maximal differentiatingpower. The method-
ologyemployedutilized the SemanticDifferential de-
velopedby Osgood?
The graphicform of the SemanticDifferential is a
paper-and-pencil test whereinthe subjectis presented
with a pair of descriptivepolar terms,suchas heavy-
light, and a stimulusto be judged.The task consists
of
CharlesE. Osgood,Psychol.Bull. 49, 197 (1952).
N. SOLOMON
indicating,with a pencilcheckmark,whichof the polar
termsappliesto the stimulus.The subjectindicatesthe
intensity of his associationby the extremenessof his
checkingon a seven-pointscale.Thus, on the heavy-
light scale,a judgmentof ! indicatesextremelyheavy,
and 7 extremelylight. A judgmentof 4 indicateseither
"neutrality" or equal associationto both endsof the
scale.
By suchmeans,it is possibleto expressthe relation-
shipbetweenitemsand scales.Any two stimulihaving
exactlythe samecheckingon all scalesin the Differen-
tial may be saidto havethe sameconnotativemeaning.
The presentresearchwascarriedout in threephases'
(1) the compilationof a seriesof descriptivescales
uponwhichsonarsoundsmay be assigned quantitative
values; (2) the determinationof the meaningfulness of
this task by an analysisof the consistency
with which
an experimental populationof observers
assigns certain
sonarsoundsto certain positionson thesescales;and
(3) a factor analysisof the intercorrelationsbetween
scalesto derive a limited numberof generaldimensions
of meaninghaving maximaldifferentiatingpower for
the soundsamplesstudied.
The compilationof scalesand the evaluationof the
consistency of the connotativeassociations
to passive
sonar soundshave been reported elsewhere23 Briefly
plied, each scalebeing definedby a pair of polar-
opposite adjectives.The adjectives
wereobtainedfrom
presentedto them; (2)
in their
factorialstudyof meaning;(3) rationalanalysisof the
sensory
inputsof the humanorganism;
and (4) the list
of high-ranking,helpful sonar recognitioncues de-
velopedby BlackandHarsh5for usein ship-classifica-
tion teachingmethods.The 50 scalesare listed in
Table I.
Sixteenmale subjectsthen rated four passivesonar
soundson the 50 scales.Test-retestresults,usinga new
statisticaltest of consistency(the inter-test interval
beingfive days)showedthat subjectsare consistent in
their ratings.The null hypothesis(subjectsmaketheir
ratingsby chance)wasrejectedat or beyondthe 1%
level of confidence for all 50 scales.
At thispoint,the factor-analysis
portionof the study
wasundertaken.The subjectsemployedwere50 Navy
sonarmenwith mediansonarexperienceof oneyear.
The stimuli usedwere 20 recordingsof passivesonar
soundstaken from records utilized by the Navy to
train sonaroperators.Each soundwas recordedon a
L. N. Solomon,Navy ElectronicsLaboratory Report 443
(1953).
4C. E. Osgood
andG. J. Suci,J. Exptl.Psychol.50,325 (1955).
5 E. L. Black and C. M. Harsh, Navy ElectronicsLaboratory
Report 342 (1953).
 SEMANTIC APPROACH TO PERCEPTION OF SOUNDS 423

TABLEI. Final rotatedfactormatrix. (Decimalpointshavebeenomitted.)

I II III IV V VI VII VIII h

* 1. pleasant-unpleasant 16 60 07 23 07 25 16 --01 5365

2. repeated-varied 01 05 41 16 --06 12 06 05 2204
3. smooth-rough -24 54 12 17 06 18 11 20 4806
4. active-passive -01 - 15 27 -- 11 --06 30 14 -- 15 2433
* 5. beautiful-ugly -11 67 13 17 07 22 12 --12 5889
6. definite-uncertain 03 04 52 06 --06 39 04 - 10 4438
* 7. low-high 71 05 - 16 14 02 18 -02 12 5994
8. powerful-weak 60 -09 35 --22 --08 06 -01 -- 17 5780
9. steady-fluttering 13 15 40 --07 --04 30 -- 16 01 3216
10. soft-loud -19 32 --28 33 12 25 16 21 4724
11.full-empty 53 13 27 -09 - 13 03 22 -- 12 4594
12.good-bad 09 59 28 16 05 02 18 -- 14 5151
'13. rumbling-whining 76 -02 --04 12 05 21 09 09 6568
14. solid-hollow 30 20 21 -07 -09 22 09 - 12 2580
'15. clear-hazy 06 21 58 -08 -01 -03 06 -01 3952
'16.calming-exciting 18 20 --06 48 05 - 12 --07 10 3382
17.pleasing-annoying 19 58 17 15 27 25 12 --06 5773
'18.large-small 79 --07 12 - 11 -01 01 -04 - 13 6742
19.clean-dirty -27 40 25 07 06 -06 21 --16 3772
20.resting-busy -02 16 -15 29 28 03 -20 13 2688
21.dull-sharp 67 -09 --20 19 13 --03 00 14 5705
22.deep'-shallow 71 04 09 -04 06 -05 08 --01 5280
23.gliding-scraping -02 29 15 01 30 29 04 22 3312
24.familiar-strange 14 14 37 18 05 35 15 --03 3569
25. soft-hard -07 24 - 12 28 36 04 21 13 3475
*26.heavy-light 84 - 13 04 --06 --06 00 -08 -- 11 7498
*27.wet-dry 21 -07 --03 --04 21 34 18 02 2440
28.safe-dangerous -06 27 12 48 20 --17 14 --17 4387
29. concentrated-diffuse 11 12 43 --07 --21 --06 03 16 2905
30.pushing-pulling 10 02 -02 21 --08 --09 09 03 0784
31.labored-easy 50 --19 --04 --05 --34 -17 --13 01 4517
32.dark-bright 57 -29 --16 -14 -04 14 --17 17 5332
*33. even-uneven -08 17 51 12 -06 17 14 16 3875
*34.loose-tight 19 13 -- 11 02 57 12 --04 --08 4128
*35. relaxed-tense 14 26 --02 20 64 -03 03 --06 5426
*36. colorful-colorless 06 28 17 - 13 06 03 41 00 3004
37. hot-cold -08 24 22 -- 13 --09 -26 13 08 2283
38. rich-thin 45 13 16 -08 17 --07 34 13 4177
39. obvious-subtle 09 06 43 10 --16 --16 12 07 2771
*40. wide-narrow 73 -07 10 -02 15 -01 05 05 5758
41. deliberate-careless 25 08 41 --03 -21 -01 30 16 3977
42.happy-sad -26 33 20 18 06 --06 31 --16 3778
43.gentle-violent -- 15 25 --05 51 34 20 14 --05 5253
44. mild-intense --02 25 -05 53 33 --06 08 03 4661
45.rounded-angular 36 07 04 02 26 23 04 17 2875
46. slow-fast 60 --09 -06 23 11 -05 --21 --04 4849
47.rugged-delicate 65 -05 15 -22 -12 --08 -02 01 5172
*48.simple-complex -04 02 15 48 11 --14 -01 00 2867
49.green-red 07 --13 - 14 20 18 16 11 -08 1579
50. masculine-feminine 70 -03 11 -- 18 -09 11 --01 15 5782
Mean squaredfactor loading 0.148 0.064 0.058 0.045 0.039 0.029 0.022 0.013

loopof magnetic anauditorystimulus duringthe test sessions

tapeto produce in SanDiegoBay alongside
the submarinefrom whichthe subjectswere obtained.
of a continuousnature. Care wastaken to avoid adding
anychance characteristics
to the sounds throughthe Each soundwaspresentedto the subjectsat a con-
recordingtechnique. stantpowerlevelandallowedto playcontinually until
The 20 soundsconsisted from the last subjecthad rated it on the last scale.This
of five representatives
eachof the fourmajorcategories of soundsastheyare procedure wascontinued untilall 50subjects hadrated
differentiated
by the Navy (i.e., warships,light-craft, each of the 20 sounds on all 50 scales. The raw data
cargoships,and submarines). Thesewerepresentedwerepunched into1000IBM cardssothat eachsubject
to thesubjectsovera Western ElectricNo. 775speaker had a separatecardfor eachsound.Each cardhad a
mountedin the centerof the ceilingof a soundproof numberfrom ! to 7 punchedin each of 50 columns,
room.The subjectssat aroundthe perimeterof the one column for each scale. Pearson product-moment
roomapproximately equidistantfromthesound source. correlations were calculated between each scale and
The soundproof roomwasmounted ona convertedeveryotherscaleusingthe data of bothsubjects and
craft(LCM),andthiscraftwasmoored sounds.
Navylanding
424 LAWRENCE N. SOLOMON

The 50X 50 correlationalmatrix thus generatedwas termsasbeautiful,pleasant,good,pleasing,and smooth.

factor analyzed using Thurstone'scomplete centroid Factor III has beenlabeled"clarity," and is identified
method. Eight factors were extracted from the data by such terms as clear, definite, even, concentrated
beforeMcNemar's criterion7for completeness of factor and obvious. Factor IV seems to represent the
extraction was met. The highest coefficientin each "security" aspectof the sonarsounds,and is associated
column of the correlation matrix was used as the with such descriptiveterms as mild, gentle, calming,
estimateof communalityof the corresponding variable. safe and simple. Factor V was labeled "relaxation"
The eight referencesaxes were rotated by means of and is characterizedby the terms relaxed, loose,soft,
the Zimmerman graphic, orthogonalsystem of rota- gentle, and mild. Factor VI seemsto reflect the degree
tion.a The rotations were guided by the criteria' of "familiarity" the sonarmanhas with the sounds,
positive manifold, simple structure, and psychological and it is expressedin suchterms as definite,familiar,
meaningfulness.Thirty-three rotations yielded an wet, active, and steady. Factor VII is the "mood"
orthogonal solution with seven interpretable factors dimensionto auditory perceptionand is characterized
and one residual. by suchterms as colorful,rich, happy, deliberate,and
full.
RESULTS
Of the 50 adjective-pairsused, 15 can be chosento
The final rotated factor matrix is presentedin Table provide a "factorially pure" instrument with which
I. From the mean squared factor loadings at the to quantify a subject's reactions to complex sounds
bottom of the columnsin Table I it may be seenthat (passivesonar sounds)along the seven dimensions
the eight factors extracted accountfor approximately isolated in this study. They are: heavy-light; large-
42% of the total variancein judgments. small;rumbling-whining;wide-narrow;low-high;beau-
The task of interpretingthe extractedfactors (i.e., tiful-ugly; pleasant-unpleasant;clear-hazy; even-un-
identifying them by name) is somewhatfacilitated even; calming-exciting;simple-complex;relaxed-tense;
because of the nature of the variables involved. A loose-tight; wet-dry (or, as an alternate' familiar-
cluster of semantic scaleshighly loaded on a given strange); and colorful-colorless.These adjective-pairs
are marked with an asterisk in Table I.
factor usually leaveslittle doubt as to the dimensionof
semantic space which that factor represents. For The number of scalesin the above list representing
example,the adjectives"heavy," "large," and "rum- a given factor is proportionalto the percentageof the
bling" heavily loaded on factor I aids in identifying varianceaccountedfor by that factor.
that factor as a "magnitude" dimension of auditory Many of these attributes, undoubtedly,reflect the
perception.The genericterm which will embracethe specificdenotativemeaningthat passivesonarsounds
majority of the scalenamesfound to be highly loaded come to have for the trained sonarmanand may not
on a given factor is usually taken to identify that be fully representativeof the characteristicswhich
particular factor. However, when interpretingfactors, would emergefrom the testing of a sample of the
it is necessaryto go beyond the given quantitative generalpopulation.For that reason,the interpretation
loadingsand to conceiverationally of a propersemantic of the factors isolated is only minimally presented
label for the mathematical dimensions. Most factor and a fuller discussionmay be found in Solomon?
analysts recognize that subjective interpretation is
involved in the identification of factors. DISCUSSION

The meaningof the first sevenfactorsmay be briefly
interpreted from the factor loadings presented in
Table I as follows:
Factor I may be called a "magnitude" dimension,
and is characterizedat one extreme by such terms as
heavy, large, rumbling, wide, and low. The other end
of the dimensionis identified by the polar opposite
terms,--light, small, whining, narrow, and high. Only
one end of the dimensionwill be presentedhere, since
the other end is always characterizedby the opposites
of the terms given.
Factor II is the aesthetic-evaluative dimension
auditory perception, and is characterizedby such
16L. L. Thurstone, Multiple-factorAnalysis (University of
ChicagoPress,Chicago,1947), Chap.VIII.
17Q. McNemar, Psychometrika7, 9 (1942).
18W. S. Zimmerman, Psychometrika11, 51 (1946).
Although the present results may be restricted to
the population employedand by the nature of the
stimuli used, the methodologyis general and may be
appliedto any set of auditory stimuli, judgedby any
sampleof the population.The generalapplicationof
the presentmethodologyto problemsin auditory per-
ceptionis immediatelyapparent.The sametechnique
usedwith sonarsoundscouldbe employedwith simple
tones,shapedwhite noise,systematicallyvaried com-
plextonesandmusicalselections. The multidimensional
scaling technique offers a systematicand objective
approachto a problem which has traditionally been
of
handledin an unsystemat.ic and introspectivemanner.
19A "factorially pure" scaleis one which is highly loaded on
one,and only onefactor, thus representingonly one dimensionof
the domain tested.
s0L. N. Solomon,Navy ElectronicsLaboratory Report 563
(1954) (Confidential).
 SEMANTIC APPROACH TO PERCEPTION OF SOUNDS 425

Once a set of sounds has been rated on a series of having the "sameconnotativemeaning"may be thus
scales(such scalesrepresentingthe dimensionsof a isolated and analyzed physically to determine the
"semanticspace"within which judgmentsare made) physicalcorrelatesof the psychological judgmentsof
the relationsbetweensoundscanbe quantifiedby means "similarity" or "togetherness." The presentauthor is
of a statistic called the D measure. 2t Clusters of sounds currentlyundertakingthis phaseof the researchwith
'tC. E. Osgoodand G. J. Suci, Psychol.Bull. 49, 251 (1952). passivesonarsounds.

THE JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA VOLUME 30, NUMBER 5 MAY, 1958

Information Transmission with Elementary Auditory Displays*

WLLArH. SurBY,DAVIS CItAalBLISS,iANDIRWIN POLLACK
Operational
Applications
Laboratory,
Air ForceCambridge
Research
Center,BollingAir ForceBase25, D.C.
(ReceivedJanuary 22, 1958)

A procedure for transmittingthe lettersof the alphabetby tone-codedsignalswasexamined

in quietand
againsta noisebackground. The procedure employedsuccessive selections,
eachfromamonga smallnumber
of alternatives,in order to transmit a target vocabularyof 25 letters. Four stimulusvariables:tonal
frequency,soundlevel, location,and durationwere examined,one at a time. Successive selectionswere
madeamongtwo, three,and five alternativesper variable.The highestreceptionrate wasobtainedwith a
three-alternative,frequency-coded display.Receptionof tone-codedsignalsin noisewasnearly equivalent
to that in the quiet,whenthe tonal signalswereabout3 db abovemaskedthreshold.

INTRODUCTION
Our approach was to examine information trans-
missionwith eachof four tonal variables:the frequency,
NDER
extremely
unfavorable
speech-to-noise
(S/N) ratios, specialproceduresfor speechcom-
soundlevel, location, and duration of a tone. While the
municationmay becomeimportant. For example,in major part of our work was carried out in the absence
tests of communicatinga single word from a target- of noise, sample tests carried out against noise back-
vocabularyof 64 wordsunderextremelylow S/N ratios, grounds will alsobe presented.
it was found that a network sequenceof six successive PROCEDURE
two-alternativeselectionsyielded communications per-
formancesubstantiallysuperiorto the six-foldrepetition Tonal patternswereencodedto representlettersof the alphabet.
Within a given test, the tones varied with respect to a single
of the target-word.t It was alsosuggested that, in the stimulus continuum, e.g., the frequency of a tone. The extremes
low-informationnetwork, words could be replaced by of the range of the stimulus continuum furnished two steps for
tonal signals.
2 Furthermore,well-developed techniques the purposesof informationcoding.With the addition of another
of noise rejection for narrow-bandsignalsmight be intermediatestep, the continuumfurnishedthree stepsfor coding;
and with the addition of still another two intermediate steps,the
expectedto provide an extensionof communication continuum furnishedfive stepsfor coding.These three codeswill
rangewith tone-codedsignals. be referred to as binary-, trinary-, and quinary-codeddisplays.
The presentstudyexaminesthe feasibilityof employ- For example,with respectto frequency,the binary-codeddisplay
ing tonal signalsfor low rates of informationtrans- employedthe two frequencies200 and 3500 cps;the trinary-coded
missionwith naive observers.We did not attempt to displayemployedthe three frequencies 200, 750, and 3500 cps;
and, the quinary-codeddisplayemployedthe five frequencies200,
achieve the rate of transmissionpossiblewith Morse 420, 750, 1810,and 3500 cps.
codeby extremelywell-trainedoperators.Rather, we Successiveindependent selectionsof tones yield an expanded
attempted to develop a procedurewhich could be set of alternatives. For example, five successiveindependent
employedby naive observersfor very modestrates of binary selectionsyield 25 or 32 alternatives; three successive
trinary selectionsyield 33 or 27 alternatives; two successive
transmission.This aim is not trivial. There are many quinary selectionsyield 5 or 35 alternatives.
military operationalsituationsin which a modestrate The procedureof successive selectionsto yield letters of the
of informational transmission with naive observers is alphabet is demonstratedby the networks of Fig. 1. Figure !
representsthe three setsof tracing boardsemployedby the sub-
extremelyuseful,e.g.,long-rangeemergency procedures. jects in the present experiment. These boards permitted the
subjectsto trace the tonal pattern through a network to arrive
* This is TechnicalReport AFCRC TR 57-12 of the Air Force at one of 25 letters. Tracing was accomplishedby moving the
CambridgeResearchCenter, ASTIA DocumentNo. AD 146779. finger along solderstrips to successive choicepoints. The choice
This researchsupportsProject 7682 of the Air Force Research points are indicated by the large dots in Fig. 1.
and DevelopmentCommandProgram in Human Engineering.
Now at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cam- An example of the subject's task follows: with five tones
bridge, Massachusetts. differingin frequency--(beep)(bip) (hap) (bop) (boop), the A
I. Pollack,J. Acoust. Soc.Am. 30, 196-201 (1958). was encoded:inthe binary tests,as (beep) (beep) (beep) (beep)
Reference1, footnote 11. (beep); in the trinary tests,as (beep) (beep) (beep); and in the