Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27031343›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Audio-Visual and Meaningful Semantic Context Enhancements in Older and Younger Adults.

Kirsten E Smayda, Kristin J Van Engen, W Todd Maddox, Bharath Chandrasekaran

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Integration of audiovisual speech perception: From infancy to older adults.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025
    Article
  4. The Effects of Video Presence on Associative and Source Memory Among Younger and Older Adults in a Virtual Social Simulation.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Noise-Vocoded Sentence Recognition and the Use of Context in Older and Younger Adult Listeners.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kirsten E SmaydaDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Kristin J Van EngenDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
W Todd MaddoxDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Bharath ChandrasekaranDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
The University of Texas at Austin · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Supplement to cortical contributions to frequency-following response generation and modulationR01DC013315 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI ABEL, TAYLOR JOHN, CHANDRASEKARAN, BHARATH · 2014 to 2025
$5.5M
Genetic Influences on Dual Processing Modes of Reward and Punishment LearningR01DA032457 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BEEVERS, CHRISTOPHER G · 2012 to 2016
$2.2M
NIDA NIH HHS DA032457NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA032457NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC013315NIDCD NIH HHS R01DC013315
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speech perception is critical to everyday life. Oftentimes noise can degrade a speech signal; however, because of the cues available to the listener, such as visual and semantic cues, noise rarely prevents conversations from continuing. The interaction of visual and semantic cues in aiding speech perception has been studied in young adults, but the extent to which these two cues interact for older adults has not been studied. To investigate the effect of visual and semantic cues on speech perception in older and younger adults, we recruited forty-five young adults (ages 18-35) and thirty-three older adults (ages 60-90) to participate in a speech perception task. Participants were presented with semantically meaningful and anomalous sentences in audio-only and audio-visual conditions. We hypothesized that young adults would outperform older adults across SNRs, modalities, and semantic contexts. In addition, we hypothesized that both young and older adults would receive a greater benefit from a semantically meaningful context in the audio-visual relative to audio-only modality. We predicted that young adults would receive greater visual benefit in semantically meaningful contexts relative to anomalous contexts. However, we predicted that older adults could receive a greater visual benefit in either semantically meaningful or anomalous contexts. Results suggested that in the most supportive context, that is, semantically meaningful sentences presented in the audiovisual modality, older adults performed similarly to young adults. In addition, both groups received the same amount of visual and meaningful benefit. Lastly, across groups, a semantically meaningful context provided more benefit in the audio-visual modality relative to the audio-only modality, and the presence of visual cues provided more benefit in semantically meaningful contexts relative to anomalous contexts. These results suggest that older adults can perceive speech as well as younger adults when both semantic and visual cues are available to the listener.

Indexed as

SemanticsSpeech PerceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAgingAuditory PerceptionHumansMaleMiddle AgedVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27031343
PMCPMC4816421
OpenAlexW2319740665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.