Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35996057›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022

Encoding speech rate in challenging listening conditions: White noise and reverberation.

Eva Reinisch, Hans Rutger Bosker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Eva ReinischAcoustics Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wohllebengasse 12-14, 1040, Vienna, Austria. Eva.Reinisch@oeaw.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1400-5473
Hans Rutger BoskerMax Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, PO Box 310, 6500 AH, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2628-7738

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Temporal contrasts in speech are perceived relative to the speech rate of the surrounding context. That is, following a fast context sentence, listeners interpret a given target sound as longer than following a slow context, and vice versa. This rate effect, often referred to as "rate-dependent speech perception," has been suggested to be the result of a robust, low-level perceptual process, typically examined in quiet laboratory settings. However, speech perception often occurs in more challenging listening conditions. Therefore, we asked whether rate-dependent perception would be (partially) compromised by signal degradation relative to a clear listening condition. Specifically, we tested effects of white noise and reverberation, with the latter specifically distorting temporal information. We hypothesized that signal degradation would reduce the precision of encoding the speech rate in the context and thereby reduce the rate effect relative to a clear context. This prediction was borne out for both types of degradation in Experiment 1, where the context sentences but not the subsequent target words were degraded. However, in Experiment 2, which compared rate effects when contexts and targets were coherent in terms of signal quality, no reduction of the rate effect was found. This suggests that, when confronted with coherently degraded signals, listeners adapt to challenging listening situations, eliminating the difference between rate-dependent perception in clear and degraded conditions. Overall, the present study contributes towards understanding the consequences of different types of listening environments on the functioning of low-level perceptual processes that listeners use during speech perception.

Indexed as

NoiseSpeech PerceptionAuditory PerceptionHumansLanguageSpeechDegraded speech perceptionPsycholinguisticsSpeech rateSpoken word recognition

Identifiers

PMID35996057
PMCPMC9481500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.