ArticlePloS one2021
Disentangling listening effort and memory load beyond behavioural evidence: Pupillary response to listening effort during a concurrent memory task.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Listening effort measurement by pupillometry under dual-task paradigms: the effect of auditory spectral resolution.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of Single-Side Deafness on Listening Effort: A Prospective Comparative Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- The Impacts of Two Adaptive Auditory-Cognitive Training Paradigms on Listening to Competing Talkers.Seminars in hearing · 2025Review
- Cochlear-implant dichotic listening performance and effort are disrupted with functional ear asymmetry.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Exploring short-term memory and listening effort in two-talker conversations: The influence of soft and moderate background noise.PloS one · 2025Article
- Pupillometry reveals effects of pitch manipulation within and across words on listening effort and short-term memory.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Time Scales and Moments of Listening Effort Revealed in Pupillometry.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- The impact of a speaker's voice quality on auditory perception and cognition: a behavioral and subjective approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Impact of SNR, peripheral auditory sensitivity, and central cognitive profile on the psychometric relation between pupillary response and speech performance in CI users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Effortful Listening Despite Correct Responses: The Cost of Mental Repair in Sentence Recognition by Listeners With Cochlear Implants.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Article
- Quantifying the Effect of Noise on Cognitive Processes: A Review of Psychophysiological Correlates of Workload.Noise & healthReview
- Grouping by Time and Pitch Facilitates Free but Not Cued Recall for Word Lists in Normally-Hearing Listeners.Trends in hearingArticle
- Time-specific Components of Pupil Responses Reveal Alternations in Effort Allocation Caused by Memory Task Demands During Speech Identification in Noise.Trends in hearingReview
- Repairing Misperceptions of Words Early in a Sentence is More Effortful Than Repairing Later Words, Especially for Listeners With Cochlear Implants.Trends in hearingArticle
- Reduced Eye Blinking During Sentence Listening Reflects Increased Cognitive Load in Challenging Auditory Conditions.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent research has demonstrated that pupillometry is a robust measure for quantifying listening effort. However, pupillary responses in listening situations where multiple cognitive functions are engaged and sustained over a period of time remain hard to interpret. This limits our conceptualisation and understanding of listening effort in realistic situations, because rarely in everyday life are people challenged by one task at a time. Therefore, the purpose of this experiment was to reveal the dynamics of listening effort in a sustained listening condition using a word repeat and recall task. Words were presented in quiet and speech-shaped noise at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNR): 0dB, 7dB, 14dB and quiet. Participants were presented with lists of 10 words, and required to repeat each word after its presentation. At the end of the list, participants either recalled as many words as possible or moved on to the next list. Simultaneously, their pupil dilation was recorded throughout the whole experiment. When only word repeating was required, peak pupil dilation (PPD) was bigger in 0dB versus other conditions; whereas when recall was required, PPD showed no difference among SNR levels and PPD in 0dB was smaller than repeat-only condition. Baseline pupil diameter and PPD followed different variation patterns across the 10 serial positions within a block for conditions requiring recall: baseline pupil diameter built up progressively and plateaued in the later positions (but shot up when listeners were recalling the previously heard words from memory); PPD decreased at a pace quicker than in repeat-only condition. The current findings demonstrate that additional cognitive load during a speech intelligibility task could disturb the well-established relation between pupillary response and listening effort. Both the magnitude and temporal pattern of task-evoked pupillary response differ greatly in complex listening conditions, urging for more listening effort studies in complex and realistic listening situations.
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.