Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32237827›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2020

The importance of processing resolution in "ideal time-frequency segregation" of masked speech and the implications for predicting speech intelligibility.

Christopher Conroy, Virginia Best, Todd R Jennings, Gerald Kidd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Christopher ConroyDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Virginia BestDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Todd R JenningsDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Gerald KiddDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.

Funding

CENTRAL FACTORS IN AUDITORY MASKINGR01DC004545 · NIDCD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI KIDD, GERALD, JR · 2000 to 2021
$9.0M
Advanced Research Training in Communication Sciences and DisordersT32DC013017 · NIDCD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI Cara E. Stepp · 2016 to 2026
$4.9M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC004545NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC013017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ideal time-frequency segregation (ITFS) is a signal processing technique that may be used to estimate the energetic and informational components of speech-on-speech masking. A core assumption of ITFS is that it roughly emulates the effects of energetic masking (EM) in a speech mixture. Thus, when speech identification thresholds are measured for ITFS-processed stimuli and compared to thresholds for unprocessed stimuli, the difference can be attributed to informational masking (IM). Interpreting this difference as a direct metric of IM, however, is complicated by the fine time-frequency (T-F) resolution typically used during ITFS, which may yield target "glimpses" that are too narrow/brief to be resolved by the ear in the mixture. Estimates of IM, therefore, may be inflated because the full effects of EM are not accounted for. Here, T-F resolution was varied during ITFS to determine if/how estimates of IM depend on processing resolution. Speech identification thresholds were measured for speech and noise maskers after ITFS. Reduced frequency resolution yielded poorer thresholds for both masker types. Reduced temporal resolution did so for noise maskers only. Results suggest that processing resolution strongly influences estimates of IM and implies that current approaches to predicting masked speech intelligibility should be modified to account for IM.

Indexed as

Speech IntelligibilitySpeech PerceptionNoisePerceptual MaskingSpeech

Identifiers

PMID32237827
PMCPMC7075715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.