ArticleEar and hearing
Recognition of Accented Speech by Cochlear-Implant Listeners: Benefit of Audiovisual Cues.
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 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.
- Visual Reliance in Severe Hearing Loss: Visual Evoked Potentials (VEPs) Study.Audiology research · 2025Article
- How to vocode: Using channel vocoders for cochlear-implant research.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Article
- Revisiting the relationship between implicit racial bias and audiovisual benefit for nonnative-accented speech.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Rapid Assessment of Non-Verbal Auditory Perception in Normal-Hearing Participants and Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Detection and Recognition of Asynchronous Auditory/Visual Speech: Effects of Age, Hearing Loss, and Talker Accent.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Audiovisual Speech Recognition With a Cochlear Implant and Increased Perceptual and Cognitive Demands.Trends in 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWhen auditory and visual speech information are presented together, listeners obtain an audiovisual (AV) benefit or a speech understanding improvement compared with auditory-only (AO) or visual-only (VO) presentations. Cochlear-implant (CI) listeners, who receive degraded speech input and therefore understand speech using primarily temporal information, seem to readily use visual cues and can achieve a larger AV benefit than normal-hearing (NH) listeners. It is unclear, however, if the AV benefit remains relatively large for CI listeners when trying to understand foreign-accented speech when compared with unaccented speech. Accented speech can introduce changes to temporal auditory cues and visual cues, which could decrease the usefulness of AV information. Furthermore, we sought to determine if the AV benefit was relatively larger in CI compared with NH listeners for both unaccented and accented speech.
designAV benefit was investigated for unaccented and Spanish-accented speech by presenting English sentences in AO, VO, and AV conditions to 15 CI and 15 age- and performance-matched NH listeners. Performance matching between NH and CI listeners was achieved by varying the number of channels of a noise vocoder for the NH listeners. Because of the differences in age and hearing history of the CI listeners, the effects of listener-related variables on speech understanding performance and AV benefit were also examined.
resultsAV benefit was observed for both unaccented and accented conditions and for both CI and NH listeners. The two groups showed similar performance for the AO and AV conditions, and the normalized AV benefit was relatively smaller for the accented than the unaccented conditions. In the CI listeners, older age was associated with significantly poorer performance with the accented speaker compared with the unaccented speaker. The negative impact of age was somewhat reduced by a significant improvement in performance with access to AV information.
conclusionsWhen auditory speech information is degraded by CI sound processing, visual cues can be used to improve speech understanding, even in the presence of a Spanish accent. The AV benefit of the CI listeners closely matched that of the NH listeners presented with vocoded speech, which was unexpected given that CI listeners appear to rely more on visual information to communicate. This result is perhaps due to the one-to-one age and performance matching of the listeners. While aging decreased CI listener performance with the accented speaker, access to visual cues boosted performance and could partially overcome the age-related speech understanding deficits for the older CI listeners.
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.