ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance2021
Attention, task demands, and multitalker processing costs in speech perception.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expertise provides resilience to sound source variability in music perception.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Working memory supports rapid talker and accent accommodation: An individual differences investigation.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Effects of attentional instructions on the behavioral and neural mechanisms of speech auditory feedback control.Neuropsychologia · 2024Article
- Sequence effects and speech processing: cognitive load for speaker-switching within and across accents.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Why are listeners hindered by talker variability?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Review
- Multiple sources of acoustic variation affect speech processing efficiency.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
- Perceptual learning of multiple talkers: Determinants, characteristics, and limitations.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Listener expectations and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability: A pre-registered replication.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021Article
- Real-Time Conversation Comprehension in Younger and Older Adults: The Effects of Noise, Visual Speech, Speaker Switch, and Context.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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Determining how human listeners achieve phonetic constancy despite a variable mapping between the acoustics of speech and phonemic categories is the longest standing challenge in speech perception. A clue comes from studies where the talker changes randomly between stimuli, which slows processing compared with a single-talker baseline. These multitalker processing costs have been observed most often in speeded monitoring paradigms, where participants respond whenever a specific item occurs. Notably, the conventional paradigm imposes attentional demands via two forms of varied mapping in mixed-talker conditions. First, target recycling (i.e., allowing items to serve as targets on some trials but as distractors on others) potentially prevents the development of task automaticity. Second, in mixed trials, participants must respond to two unique stimuli (i.e., one target produced by each talker), whereas in blocked conditions, they need respond to only one token (i.e., multiple target tokens). We seek to understand how attentional demands influence talker normalization, as measured by multitalker processing costs. Across four experiments, multitalker processing costs persisted when target recycling was not allowed but diminished when only one stimulus served as the target on mixed trials. We discuss the logic of using varied mapping to elicit attentional effects and implications for theories of speech perception. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
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.