Literature DB >> 34261392

Listening Effort Is Not the Same as Speech Intelligibility Score.

Matthew B Winn1, Katherine H Teece1.   

Abstract

Listening effort is a valuable and important notion to measure because it is among the primary complaints of people with hearing loss. It is tempting and intuitive to accept speech intelligibility scores as a proxy for listening effort, but this link is likely oversimplified and lacks actionable explanatory power. This study was conducted to explain the mechanisms of listening effort that are not captured by intelligibility scores, using sentence-repetition tasks where specific kinds of mistakes were prospectively planned or analyzed retrospectively. Effort measured as changes in pupil size among 20 listeners with normal hearing and 19 listeners with cochlear implants. Experiment 1 demonstrates that mental correction of misperceived words increases effort even when responses are correct. Experiment 2 shows that for incorrect responses, listening effort is not a function of the proportion of words correct but is rather driven by the types of errors, position of errors within a sentence, and the need to resolve ambiguity, reflecting how easily the listener can make sense of a perception. A simple taxonomy of error types is provided that is both intuitive and consistent with data from these two experiments. The diversity of errors in these experiments implies that speech perception tasks can be designed prospectively to elicit the mistakes that are more closely linked with effort. Although mental corrective action and number of mistakes can scale together in many experiments, it is possible to dissociate them to advance toward a more explanatory (rather than correlational) account of listening effort.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cochlear implants; listening effort; pupillometry; speech intelligibility; speech perception

Year:  2021        PMID: 34261392     DOI: 10.1177/23312165211027688

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Hear        ISSN: 2331-2165            Impact factor:   3.293


  11 in total

1.  Older adult recognition error patterns when listening to interrupted speech and speech in steady-state noise.

Authors:  Kimberly G Smith; Daniel Fogerty
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Adults with cochlear implants can use prosody to determine the clausal structure of spoken sentences.

Authors:  Nicole M Amichetti; Jonathan Neukam; Alexander J Kinney; Nicole Capach; Samantha U March; Mario A Svirsky; Arthur Wingfield
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Cognitive and Physiological Measures of Listening Effort During Degraded Speech Perception: Relating Dual-Task and Pupillometry Paradigms.

Authors:  Sarah Colby; Bob McMurray
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-09-07       Impact factor: 2.674

4.  Strategic perceptual weighting of acoustic cues for word stress in listeners with cochlear implants, acoustic hearing, or simulated bimodal hearing.

Authors:  Justin T Fleming; Matthew B Winn
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.482

5.  Glimpsing keywords across sentences in noise: A microstructural analysis of acoustic, lexical, and listener factors.

Authors:  Daniel Fogerty; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 2.482

6.  Phonological and semantic similarity of misperceived words in babble: Effects of sentence context, age, and hearing loss.

Authors:  Blythe Vickery; Daniel Fogerty; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Study of Listening Effort in Young Children with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Amanda Saksida; Sara Ghiselli; Stefano Bembich; Alessandro Scorpecci; Sara Giannantonio; Alessandra Resca; Pasquale Marsella; Eva Orzan
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2021-12-21

8.  Visualization of Speech Perception Analysis via Phoneme Alignment: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  J Tilak Ratnanather; Lydia C Wang; Seung-Ho Bae; Erin R O'Neill; Elad Sagi; Daniel J Tward
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.003

9.  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

10.  Attention to Speech and Music in Young Children with Bilateral Cochlear Implants: A Pupillometry Study.

Authors:  Amanda Saksida; Sara Ghiselli; Lorenzo Picinali; Sara Pintonello; Saba Battelino; Eva Orzan
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 4.241

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.