Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Hear Res. 2023 Apr 10;433:108767. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2023.108767

Figure 5: Comparison of IC-model derived mTRF to acoustic feature derived TRFs.

Figure 5:

A) The grand mean prediction correlation values for each type of TRF (mean ±SEM). The IC-model and AB-envelope TRF models were significantly higher than the envelope and spectrogram models. There was no significant difference between envelope and spectrogram prediction accuracy or between IC-model and AB-envelope prediction accuracy (p>0.05). The combined AB+IC TRF outperformed all other models. B) Correlation values were plotted for each subject individually. Data was sorted according to the prediction correlation values for the AB+IC model. Despite some variability across subjects, it is clear that the AB+IC mTRF model performs the best and the envelope TRF has the poorest performance across subjects.