ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2018
Reliability and Repeatability of the Speech Cue Profile.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contributions of Behavioral and Electrophysiological Spectrotemporal Processing to the Perception of Degraded Speech in Younger and Older Adults.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Relating Suprathreshold Auditory Processing Abilities to Speech Understanding in Competition.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Does the Speech Cue Profile Affect Response to Amplitude Envelope Distortion?Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021Article
- Contributions to Speech-Cue Weighting in Older Adults With Impaired Hearing.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Researchers have long noted speech recognition variability that is not explained by the pure-tone audiogram. Previous work (Souza, Wright, Blackburn, Tatman, & Gallun, 2015) demonstrated that a small number of listeners with sensorineural hearing loss utilized different types of acoustic cues to identify speechlike stimuli, specifically the extent to which the participant relied upon spectral (or temporal) information for identification. Consistent with recent calls for data rigor and reproducibility, the primary aims of this study were to replicate the pattern of cue use in a larger cohort and to verify stability of the cue profiles over time. Method: Cue-use profiles were measured for adults with sensorineural hearing loss using a syllable identification task consisting of synthetic speechlike stimuli in which spectral and temporal dimensions were manipulated along continua. For the first set, a static spectral shape varied from alveolar to palatal, and a temporal envelope rise time varied from affricate to fricative. For the second set, formant transitions varied from labial to alveolar and a temporal envelope rise time varied from approximant to stop. A discriminant feature analysis was used to determine to what degree spectral and temporal information contributed to stimulus identification. A subset of participants completed a 2nd visit using the same stimuli and procedures. Results: When spectral information was static, most participants were more influenced by spectral than by temporal information. When spectral information was dynamic, participants demonstrated a balanced distribution of cue-use patterns, with nearly equal numbers of individuals influenced by spectral or temporal cues. Individual cue profile was repeatable over a period of several months. Conclusion: In combination with previously published data, these results indicate that listeners with sensorineural hearing loss are influenced by different cues to identify speechlike sounds and that those patterns are stable over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.