ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024
The effect of motor resource suppression on speech perception in noise in younger and older listeners: An online study.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Speech motor resources may be recruited to assist challenging speech perception in younger normally hearing listeners, but the extent to which this occurs for older adult listeners is unclear. We investigated if speech motor resources are also recruited in older adults during speech perception. Specifically, we investigated if suppression of speech motor resources via sub-vocal rehearsal affects speech perception compared to non-speech motor suppression (jaw movement) and passive listening. Participants identified words in speech-shaped noise at signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) from -16 to +16 dB in three listening conditions during which participants: (1) opened and closed their jaw (non-speech movement); (2) sub-vocally mimed 'the' (articulatory suppression); (3) produced no concurrent movement (passive listening). Data from 46 younger adults (M age = 20.17 years, SD = 1.61, 36 female) and 41 older adults (M age = 69 years, SD = 5.82, 21 female) were analysed. Linear mixed effects modelling investigated the impact of age, listening condition, and self-reported hearing ability on speech perception (d' prime). Results indicated that speech perception ability was significantly worse in older adults relative to younger adults across all listening conditions. A significant interaction between age group and listening condition indicated that younger adults showed poorer performance during articulatory suppression compared to passive listening, but older adults performed equivalently across conditions. This finding suggests that speech motor resources are less available to support speech perception in older adults, providing important insights for auditory-motor integration for speech understanding and communication in ageing.
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.