PURPOSE: We evaluated 2 measures of listening effort (a self-report measure and a word recall measure) regarding their suitability for inclusion in a comprehensive audiologic testing protocol. The relationship between the 2 measures was explored, and both measures were examined with regard to validity, sensitivity, and effect on speech intelligibility performance. METHOD: Thirty adults with normal hearing participated. Speech intelligibility performance was evaluated at 4 signal-to-noise ratios by using keywords embedded in both high- and low-context sentences. Listening effort was evaluated at set intervals throughout the speech intelligibility task. RESULTS: Results obtained with the 2 measures were consistent with expected changes in listening effort. However, data obtained with the self-report method demonstrated greater sensitivity to these changes. The 2 measures were uncorrelated. Under certain conditions, speech intelligibility performance was more negatively affected when the word recall measure was used. Exploration of additional theoretical and practical considerations supported a conclusion that the self-report measure was preferable for measuring listening effort simultaneously with speech intelligibility. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide a rationale for preferring the self-report measure of listening effort over the word recall measure when testing audiologic outcomes.
PURPOSE: We evaluated 2 measures of listening effort (a self-report measure and a word recall measure) regarding their suitability for inclusion in a comprehensive audiologic testing protocol. The relationship between the 2 measures was explored, and both measures were examined with regard to validity, sensitivity, and effect on speech intelligibility performance. METHOD: Thirty adults with normal hearing participated. Speech intelligibility performance was evaluated at 4 signal-to-noise ratios by using keywords embedded in both high- and low-context sentences. Listening effort was evaluated at set intervals throughout the speech intelligibility task. RESULTS: Results obtained with the 2 measures were consistent with expected changes in listening effort. However, data obtained with the self-report method demonstrated greater sensitivity to these changes. The 2 measures were uncorrelated. Under certain conditions, speech intelligibility performance was more negatively affected when the word recall measure was used. Exploration of additional theoretical and practical considerations supported a conclusion that the self-report measure was preferable for measuring listening effort simultaneously with speech intelligibility. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide a rationale for preferring the self-report measure of listening effort over the word recall measure when testing audiologic outcomes.
Authors: Ronan McGarrigle; Kevin J Munro; Piers Dawes; Andrew J Stewart; David R Moore; Johanna G Barry; Sygal Amitay Journal: Int J Audiol Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 2.117