ArticleCurrent research in neurobiology2022
Investigating effortful speech perception using fNIRS and pupillometry measures.
Article in Current research in neurobiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Look into my eyes: What can eye-based measures tell us about the relationship between physical activity and cognitive performance?Journal of sport and health science · 2023Pooled it
- Spatial separation enhances speech intelligibility but increases listening effort with session-dependent variability in pupillometric measures.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Neuroplasticity of Speech-in-Noise Processing in Older Adults Assessed by Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS).Brain topography · 2024Article
- Cortical mechanisms of across-ear speech integration investigated using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS).PloS one · 2024Article
- High-Density Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy and Machine Learning for Visual Perception Quantification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Interaural Time and Level Differences Contribute Differently to Source Segregation and Spatial Selection.Trends in hearingArticle
- The Benefit of Hearing Aids as Measured by Listening Accuracy, Subjective Listening Effort, and Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy.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
The current study examined the neural mechanisms for mental effort and its correlation to speech perception using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in listeners with normal hearing (NH). Data were collected while participants listened and responded to unprocessed and degraded sentences, where words were presented in grammatically correct or shuffled order. Effortful listening and task difficulty due to stimulus manipulations was confirmed using a subjective questionnaire and a well-established objective measure of mental effort - pupillometry. fNIRS measures focused on cortical responses in two Results: demonstrated that changes in pupil dilation were positively correlated with the self-reported task difficulty levels and negatively correlated with the task performance scores. A significant and negative correlation between the two behavioral measures was also found. That is, as perceived task demands increased and task performance scores decreased, pupils dilated more. fNIRS measures (cerebral oxygenation) in the left AC and LFC were both negatively correlated with the self-reported task difficulty levels and positively correlated with task performance scores. These results suggest that pupillometry measures can indicate task demands and listening effort; whereas, fNIRS measures using a similar paradigm seem to reflect speech processing, but not effort.
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.