Literature DB >> 28557490

Combined effects of form- and meaning-based predictability on perceived clarity of speech.

Carine Signoret1, Ingrid Johnsrude2, Elisabet Classon1, Mary Rudner1.   

Abstract

The perceptual clarity of speech is influenced by more than just the acoustic quality of the sound; it also depends on contextual support. For example, a degraded sentence is perceived to be clearer when the content of the speech signal is provided with matching text (i.e., form-based predictability) before hearing the degraded sentence. Here, we investigate whether sentence-level semantic coherence (i.e., meaning-based predictability), enhances perceptual clarity of degraded sentences, and if so, whether the mechanism is the same as that underlying enhancement by matching text. We also ask whether form- and meaning-based predictability are related to individual differences in cognitive abilities. Twenty participants listened to spoken sentences that were either clear or degraded by noise vocoding and rated the clarity of each item. The sentences had either high or low semantic coherence. Each spoken word was preceded by the homologous printed word (matching text), or by a meaningless letter string (nonmatching text). Cognitive abilities were measured with a working memory test. Results showed that perceptual clarity was significantly enhanced both by matching text and by semantic coherence. Importantly, high coherence enhanced the perceptual clarity of the degraded sentences even when they were preceded by matching text, suggesting that the effects of form- and meaning-based predictions on perceptual clarity are independent and additive. However, when working memory capacity indexed by the Size-Comparison Span Test was controlled for, only form-based predictions enhanced perceptual clarity, and then only at some sound quality levels, suggesting that prediction effects are to a certain extent dependent on cognitive abilities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28557490     DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000442

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  10 in total

1.  Absorption and Enjoyment During Listening to Acoustically Masked Stories.

Authors:  Björn Herrmann; Ingrid S Johnsrude
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

2.  Role of semantic context and talker variability in speech perception of cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Erin R O'Neill; Morgan N Parke; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Listening Effort: How the Cognitive Consequences of Acoustic Challenge Are Reflected in Brain and Behavior.

Authors:  Jonathan E Peelle
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Neural Speech Tracking in the Theta and in the Delta Frequency Band Differentially Encode Clarity and Comprehension of Speech in Noise.

Authors:  Octave Etard; Tobias Reichenbach
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy as a Measure of Listening Effort in Older Adults Who Use Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Joseph Rovetti; Huiwen Goy; M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller; Frank A Russo
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

6.  Lexical Effects on the Perceived Clarity of Noise-Vocoded Speech in Younger and Older Listeners.

Authors:  Terrin N Tamati; Victoria A Sevich; Emily M Clausing; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-01

Review 7.  The cognitive hearing science perspective on perceiving, understanding, and remembering language: The ELU model.

Authors:  Jerker Rönnberg; Carine Signoret; Josefine Andin; Emil Holmer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-01

8.  Lexical Diversity, Lexical Sophistication, and Predictability for Speech in Multiple Listening Conditions.

Authors:  Melissa M Baese-Berk; Shiloh Drake; Kurtis Foster; Dae-Yong Lee; Cecelia Staggs; Jonathan M Wright
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-18

9.  Cognitive factors contribute to speech perception in cochlear-implant users and age-matched normal-hearing listeners under vocoded conditions.

Authors:  Erin R O'Neill; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Age-Related Differences in Auditory Cortex Activity During Spoken Word Recognition.

Authors:  Chad S Rogers; Michael S Jones; Sarah McConkey; Brent Spehar; Kristin J Van Engen; Mitchell S Sommers; Jonathan E Peelle
Journal:  Neurobiol Lang (Camb)       Date:  2020-10-01
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.