ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The impact of a speaker's voice quality on auditory perception and cognition: a behavioral and subjective approach.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hearing and Listening Difficulties in High Schools and Universities: The Results of an Exploratory Survey of a Large Number of Students and Teachers in the Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Umbria Regions, Italy.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Exploring short-term memory and listening effort in two-talker conversations: The influence of soft and moderate background noise.PloS one · 2025Article
- Voice, vulnerability, and expressive growth: investigating AI anxiety and performance appraisal in voice arts education.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- A lecturer's voice quality and its effect on memory, listening effort, and perception in a VR environment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Our voice is key for conveying information and knowledge to others during verbal communication. However, those who heavily depend on their voice, such as teachers and university professors, often develop voice problems, signaled by hoarseness. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of hoarseness on listeners' memory for auditory-verbal information, listening effort, and listening impression. Methods: Forty-eight normally hearing adults performed two memory tasks that were auditorily presented in varied voice quality (typical vs. hoarse). The tasks were Heard Text Recall, as part of a dual-task paradigm, and auditory Verbal Serial Recall (aVSR). Participants also completed a listening impression questionnaire for both voice qualities. Behavioral measures of memory for auditory-verbal information and listening effort were performance and response time. Subjective measures of listening effort and other aspects of listening impression were questionnaire rating scores. Results: Results showed that, except for the aVSR, behavioral outcomes did not vary with the speaker's voice quality. Regarding the aVSR, we found a significant interaction between voice quality and trial, indicating that participants' recall performance dropped in the beginning of the task in the hoarse-voice condition but not in the typical-voice condition, and then increased again toward the end. Results from the listening impression questionnaire showed that listening to the hoarse voice resulted in significantly increased perceived listening effort, greater annoyance and poorer self-reported performance. Discussion: These findings suggest that hoarseness can, at least subjectively, compromise effective listening. Vocal health may be particularly important in the educational context, where listening and learning are closely linked.
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.