ArticleEar and hearing
Effects of Reverberation on the Relation Between Compression Speed and Working Memory for Speech-in-Noise Perception.
Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Objective intelligibility measurement of reverberant vocoded speech for normal-hearing listeners: Towards facilitating the development of speech enhancement algorithms for cochlear implants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Article
- Influence of Audibility and Distortion on Recognition of Reverberant Speech for Children and Adults with Hearing Aid Amplification.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2022Article
- Modeling the Relationship Between Listener Factors and Envelope Fidelity: A Pooled Analysis Spanning a Decade.Ear and hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPrevious study has suggested that when listening in modulated noise, individuals benefit from different wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) speeds depending on their working memory ability. Reverberation reduces the modulation depth of signals and may impact the relation between WDRC speed and working memory. The purpose of this study was to examine this relation across a range of reverberant conditions.
designTwenty-eight older listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing impairment were recruited in the present study. Individual working memory was measured using a Reading Span test. Sentences were combined with noise at two signal to noise ratios (2 and 5 dB SNR), and reverberation was simulated at a range of reverberation times (0.00, 0.75, 1.50, and 3.00 sec). Speech intelligibility was measured in listeners when listening to the sentences processed with simulated fast-acting and slow-acting WDRC conditions.
resultsThere was a significant relation between WDRC speed and working memory with minimal or no reverberation. Consistent with previous research, this relation was such that individuals with high working memory had higher speech intelligibility with fast-acting WDRC, and individuals with low working memory performed better with slow-acting WDRC. However, at longer reverberation times, there was no relation between WDRC speed and working memory.
conclusionsConsistent with previous studies, results suggest that there is an advantage of tailoring WDRC speed based on an individual's working memory under anechoic conditions. However, the present results further suggest that there may not be such a benefit in reverberant listening environments due to reduction in signal modulation.
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.