Talk:Auditory illusion

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Neurology Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2020 and 9 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MikaylaS2000. Peer reviewers: Js134.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2019 and 1 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amarburger18, Synthesis77.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

I think this entry should be disambiguated - a link to Illusion in the Psychiatric sense. --harry 15:55, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think the Doppler Effect is a physical effect, not an illusion. There is a real change in pitch. -- Emperorbma 10:26, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

All perceptions, including illusions, are physical and perceptual. Arguably, there is no real change in pitch, as long as you are moving at the same speed as the object producing sound. However, I agree that the Doppler Effect is questionable as an illusion, but it is not a fine line.Hyacinth 16:55, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

From Doppler effect, emphasis mine: "The Doppler effect is the apparent change in frequency or wavelength of a wave that is perceived by an observer moving relative to the source of the waves."Hyacinth

Yes, but the wavelength relative to the observer actually does change. We can actually measure this. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 01:46, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Doppler effect is not an illusion. If you experience a sound wave, it's real, not psychiatric, and you have no way of telling whether it came from a stationary object or a moving object by performing measurements on the sound wave only. With the extra information that it came from a moving object, then by the laws of physics, you can now say that the frequency of the moving emitter is not the same as the frequency of the sound you hear. There is no "illusion" involved. The doppler effect is NOT an auditory illusion.PAR (talk) 18:27, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article has mostly good sources, but I think that it could use less of the .com sources to make it more reliable. It could also use some more sources in general. MikaylaS2000 (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Audio Paradox[edit]

An alternate name for this type of effect is audio paradox. Just Google it and you'll find a bunch of hits to this same material. We should include this as an alternate name and direct searches on Audio Paradox to this page.

Potential Sources for the topic of Auditory Illusions https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/auditory-illusion

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091125134655.htm

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13355-sound-effects-five-great-auditory-illusions/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/auditory-illusions-10-04-25/ Amarburger18 (talk) 04:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC) Amarburger18 (talk) 04:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody commented on our page. Amarburger18 (talk) 03:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]