ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2019
Error patterns of native and non-native listeners' perception of speech in noise.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of depression on speech perception in noise.PloS one · 2019Trial
- English vowel identification in noise shows reduced native-language influence: a behavioral study using machine-learning analysis of Chinese children.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The effect of modality onset asynchrony and processing time on the recognition of text-supplemented speech.JASA express letters · 2023Article
- Phonological and semantic similarity of misperceived words in babble: Effects of sentence context, age, and hearing loss.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Article
- Older adult recognition error patterns when listening to interrupted speech and speech in steady-state noise.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021Article
- Second Language Experience Facilitates Sentence Recognition in Temporally-Modulated Noise for Non-native Listeners.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Speech perception in noise requires both bottom-up sampling of the stimulus and top-down reconstruction of the masked signal from a language model. Previous studies have provided mixed evidence about the exact role that linguistic knowledge plays in native and non-native listeners' perception of masked speech. This paper describes an analysis of whole utterance, content word, and morphosyntactic error patterns to test the prediction that non-native listeners are uniquely affected by energetic and informational masks because of limited information at multiple linguistic levels. The results reveal a consistent disadvantage for non-native listeners at all three levels in challenging listening environments.
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.