Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36519812›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of audiology2024

Input-related demands: vocoded sentences evoke different pupillometrics and subjective listening effort than sentences in speech-shaped noise.

Nicholas P Giuliani, Soumya Venkitakrishnan, Yu-Hsiang Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of audiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Nicholas P GiulianiDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4030-6245
Soumya VenkitakrishnanDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Yu-Hsiang WuDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, USA.

Funding

Speech Production &LanguageP50DC000242 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Inyong Choi · 1989 to 2026
$58.8M
ACL HHS 90REGE0013NIDCD NIH HHS P50 DC000242
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe Framework for Effortful Listening (FUEL) suggests five input-related demands can alter listening effort: source, transmission, listener, message and context factors. We hypothesised that vocoded sentences represented a source factor degradation and sentences in speech-shaped noise represented a transmission factor degradation. We used pupillometry and a subjective scale to examine our hypothesis.

designParticipants listened to vocoded sentences and sentences in speech-shaped noise at several difficulty levels designed to produce similar word recognition abilities; they also listened to unprocessed sentences. Within-participant pupillometrics and subjective listening effort were analysed. Post-hoc analyses were performed to examine if word recognition accuracy differentially influenced pupil responses. STUDY SAMPLES: Twenty young adults with normal hearing.

resultsBaseline pupil diameter was significantly smaller, peak pupil dilation was significantly larger, peak pupil dilation latency was significantly shorter, and subjective listening effort was significantly greater for the vocoded sentences than the sentences-in-noise. Word recognition ability also affected pupillometrics, but only for the vocoded sentences.

conclusionsOur findings suggest that source factor degradations result in greater listening effort than transmission factor degradations. Future research should address how clinical interventions tailored towards different input-related demands may lead to reduced listening effort and improve patient outcomes.

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech PerceptionHumansListening EffortNoisePupilYoung Adultinput-related demandsListening effortpupillometricspupillometryvocoded

Identifiers

PMID36519812
PMCPMC10947987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.