ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
Listener characteristics differentially affect self-reported and physiological measures of effort associated with two challenging listening conditions.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Correlations Between Measures of Listening Effort in Adults and Children: A Systematic Review with Narrative Synthesis.Trends in hearingPooled it
- Quantifying the Effects of Motivation on Listening Effort: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Trends in hearingPooled it
- Electromyographic responses of the auriculomotor system during effortful listening in hearing aid users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Listening effort and stress in tinnitus: a multidimensional approach.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- Relations Among Multiple Dimensions of Self-Reported Listening Effort in Response to an Auditory Psychomotor Vigilance Task.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Article
- Input-related demands: vocoded sentences evoke different pupillometrics and subjective listening effort than sentences in speech-shaped noise.International journal of audiology · 2024Article
- Electromyographic correlates of effortful listening in the vestigial auriculomotor system.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- The Influence of Sensorineural Hearing Loss on the Relationship Between the Perception of Speech in Noise and Dysarthric Speech.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Individual characteristics moderate listening effort in noisy classrooms.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Combining Multiple Psychophysiological Measures of Listening Effort: Challenges and Recommendations.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Be Quiet! Effects of Competing Speakers and Individual Characteristics on Listening Comprehension for Primary School Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Sensory-Processing Sensitivity Predicts Fatigue From Listening, But Not Perceived Effort, in Young and Older Adults.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Beyond Speech Intelligibility: Quantifying Behavioral and Perceived Listening Effort in Response to Dysarthric Speech.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Personality captures dissociations of subjective versus objective hearing in noise.Royal Society open science · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Listeners vary in their ability to understand speech in adverse conditions. Differences in both cognitive and linguistic capacities play a role, but increasing evidence suggests that such factors may contribute differentially depending on the listening challenge. Here, we used multilevel modeling to evaluate contributions of individual differences in age, hearing thresholds, vocabulary, selective attention, working memory capacity, personality traits, and noise sensitivity to variability in measures of comprehension and listening effort in two listening conditions. A total of 35 participants completed a battery of cognitive and linguistic tests as well as a spoken story comprehension task using (1) native-accented English speech masked by speech-shaped noise and (2) nonnative accented English speech without masking. Masker levels were adjusted individually to ensure each participant would show (close to) equivalent word recognition performance across the two conditions. Dependent measures included comprehension tests results, self-rated effort, and electrodermal, cardiovascular, and facial electromyographic measures associated with listening effort. Results showed varied patterns of responsivity across different dependent measures as well as across listening conditions. In particular, results suggested that working memory capacity may play a greater role in the comprehension of nonnative accented speech than noise-masked speech, while hearing acuity and personality may have a stronger influence on physiological responses affected by demands of understanding speech in noise. Furthermore, electrodermal measures may be more strongly affected by affective response to noise-related interference while cardiovascular responses may be more strongly affected by demands on working memory and lexical access.
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.