Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34717484›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2021

Accuracy and cue use in word segmentation for cochlear-implant listeners and normal-hearing listeners presented vocoded speech.

Christopher C Heffner, Brittany N Jaekel, Rochelle S Newman, Matthew J Goupell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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 C HeffnerProgram in Neuroscience and Cognitive Science, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.
Brittany N JaekelDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.
Rochelle S NewmanDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.
Matthew J GoupellDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.

Funding

COMPARATIVE AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY OF HEARINGT32DC000046 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI Catherine Emily Carr, Matthew J. Goupell · 1994 to 2026
$7.5M
Temporal processing and speech understanding in older cochlear implanteesR01AG051603 · NIA · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI GOUPELL, MATTHEW J. · 2016 to 2020
$1.9M
Effects of interrupting noise and speech repair mechanisms in child and adult cochlear-implant usersF31DC017362 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI JAEKEL, BRITTANY · 2018 to 2019
$66k
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG051603NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC017362NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear-implant (CI) listeners experience signal degradation, which leads to poorer speech perception than normal-hearing (NH) listeners. In the present study, difficulty with word segmentation, the process of perceptually parsing the speech stream into separate words, is considered as a possible contributor to this decrease in performance. CI listeners were compared to a group of NH listeners (presented with unprocessed speech and eight-channel noise-vocoded speech) in their ability to segment phrases with word segmentation ambiguities (e.g., "an iceman" vs "a nice man"). The results showed that CI listeners and NH listeners were worse at segmenting words when hearing processed speech than NH listeners were when presented with unprocessed speech. When viewed at a broad level, all of the groups used cues to word segmentation in similar ways. Detailed analyses, however, indicated that the two processed speech groups weighted top-down knowledge cues to word boundaries more and weighted acoustic cues to word boundaries less relative to NH listeners presented with unprocessed speech.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationCuesHearingHumansMaleSpeech

Identifiers

PMID34717484
PMCPMC8528550

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.