ArticleScientific reports2022
Rapid but specific perceptual learning partially explains individual differences in the recognition of challenging speech.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From first encounters to longitudinal exposure: a repeated exposure-test paradigm for monitoring speech adaptation.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Implicit learning and individual differences in speech recognition: an exploratory study.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The Impact of Trained Conditions on the Generalization of Learning Gains Following Voice Discrimination Training.Trends in hearingArticle
- Auditory Learning and Generalization in Older Adults: Evidence from Voice Discrimination Training.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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perceptual learning for speech, defined as long-lasting changes in speech recognition following exposure or practice occurs under many challenging listening conditions. However, this learning is also highly specific to the conditions in which it occurred, such that its function in adult speech recognition is not clear. We used a time-compressed speech task to assess learning following either brief exposure (rapid learning) or additional training (training-induced learning). Both types of learning were robust and long-lasting. Individual differences in rapid learning explained unique variance in recognizing natural-fast speech and speech-in-noise with no additional contribution for training-induced learning (Experiment 1). Rapid learning was stimulus specific (Experiment 2), as in previous studies on training-induced learning. We suggest that rapid learning is key for understanding the role of perceptual learning in online speech recognition whereas longer training could provide additional opportunities to consolidate and stabilize learning.
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.