Literature DB >> 20588118

Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.

Adriana A Zekveld1, Sophia E Kramer, Joost M Festen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of sentence intelligibility on the pupil dilation response during listening. Task-induced pupil-dilation reflects explicit effortful processing load. Therefore, pupillometry can be used to examine the listening effort during speech perception in difficult listening conditions. We expected to find increasing pupil dilation as a function of decreasing speech intelligibility.
DESIGN: Thirty-eight young participants (mean age = 23 yrs, SD = 3.2 yrs) with normal hearing were included. They performed three speech reception threshold (SRT) tests in which they listened to sentences in stationary noise. A one-up-one-down, two-up-one-down, or four-up-one-down adaptive procedure was applied, resulting in the correct rehearsal of 50, 71, or 84% of the sentences (SRT(50%), SRT(71%), and SRT(84%), respectively). We examined the peak dilation amplitude, the latency of the peak dilation amplitude, and the mean pupil dilation during the processing of the speech in each of these conditions. The peak dilation amplitude and mean pupil dilation were calculated relative to the baseline pupil diameter during listening to noise alone. For each SRT condition, participants rated the experienced listening effort and estimated their performance level.
RESULTS: The signal to noise ratios (SNRs) in the SRT(50%), SRT(71%), and SRT(84%) conditions increased as a function of the speech intelligibility level. The subjective effort ratings decreased, and the estimated performance increased with increasing speech intelligibility level. Repeated measures analyses of variance indicated that peak dilation amplitude and mean pupil dilation were higher in the SRT(50%) condition as compared with the SRT(71%) and SRT(84%) conditions. The peak dilation amplitude, mean pupil dilation, and peak latency increased with decreasing SNR of the speech in noise, but no effect of noise level by itself on the baseline pupil diameter was observed. Irrespective of SNR, the pupil response was higher for incorrectly repeated sentences than for correctly repeated sentences. The analyses also indicated condition-order effects on the peak dilation amplitude and mean pupil dilatation: the pupil response was higher in the first SRT test than in the second and third tests. Within the first and third test, the baseline pupil diameter and the mean pupil dilation decreased as a function of the sentence number within the test. Spearman correlation coefficients showed no relations among the SNRs at the SRTs, subjective ratings, and the pupil response.
CONCLUSIONS: The peak dilation amplitude, peak latency, and mean pupil dilation systematically increase with decreasing speech intelligibility. These results support that listening effort, as indicated by the pupil response, increases with decreasing speech intelligibility. This study indicates that pupillometry can be used to examine how listeners reach a certain performance level. Application of this technique to study listening effort can yield valuable insight into the processing resources required across listening conditions and into the factors related to interindividual differences in speech perception in noise.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20588118     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d4f251

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  97 in total

1.  The hidden effect of hearing acuity on speech recall, and compensatory effects of self-paced listening.

Authors:  Tepring Piquado; Jonathan I Benichov; Hiram Brownell; Arthur Wingfield
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 2.117

2.  Listener effort for highly intelligible tracheoesophageal speech.

Authors:  Kathy F Nagle; Tanya L Eadie
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 2.288

3.  Psychometric Functions of Dual-Task Paradigms for Measuring Listening Effort.

Authors:  Yu-Hsiang Wu; Elizabeth Stangl; Xuyang Zhang; Joanna Perkins; Emily Eilers
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Pupillometry shows the effort of auditory attention switching.

Authors:  Daniel R McCloy; Bonnie K Lau; Eric Larson; Katherine A I Pratt; Adrian K C Lee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Benefit of binaural listening as revealed by speech intelligibility and listening effort.

Authors:  Jan Rennies; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Mandarin Tone and Vowel Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users: Effects of Talker Variability and Bimodal Hearing.

Authors:  Yi-Ping Chang; Ronald Y Chang; Chun-Yi Lin; Xin Luo
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  The Effects of Meaning-Based Auditory Training on Behavioral Measures of Perceptual Effort in Individuals with Impaired Hearing.

Authors:  Mitchell S Sommers; Nancy Tye-Murray; Joe Barcroft; Brent P Spehar
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2015-11

8.  Understanding Speech Amid the Jingle and Jangle: Recommendations for Improving Measurement Practices in Listening Effort Research.

Authors:  Julia F Strand; Lucia Ray; Naseem H Dillman-Hasso; Jed Villanueva; Violet A Brown
Journal:  Audit Percept Cogn       Date:  2021-03-23

9.  Cochlear implantation with hearing preservation yields significant benefit for speech recognition in complex listening environments.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman; Henryk Skarzynski; Artur Lorens; Marek Polak; Colin L W Driscoll; Peter Roland; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Pupil size varies with word listening and response selection difficulty in older adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Stefanie E Kuchinsky; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Kenneth I Vaden; Stephanie L Cute; Larry E Humes; Judy R Dubno; Mark A Eckert
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 4.016

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.