ArticleScientific reports2024
Spatial hearing training in virtual reality with simulated asymmetric hearing loss.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Augmented Reality Audio-Motor Training Game for Improving Speech-in-Noise Perception: Single-Arm Pilot Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- The contribution of audition and proprioception in unisensory and multisensory target reaching.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prior expectations guide multisensory integration during face-to-face communication.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Active listening modulates the spatial hearing experience: a multicentric study.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Previous binaural experience supports compensatory strategies in hearing-impaired children's auditory horizontal localization.PloS one · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Sound localization is essential to perceive the surrounding world and to interact with objects. This ability can be learned across time, and multisensory and motor cues play a crucial role in the learning process. A recent study demonstrated that when training localization skills, reaching to the sound source to determine its position reduced localization errors faster and to a greater extent as compared to just naming sources' positions, despite the fact that in both tasks, participants received the same feedback about the correct position of sound sources in case of wrong response. However, it remains to establish which features have made reaching to sound more effective as compared to naming. In the present study, we introduced a further condition in which the hand is the effector providing the response, but without it reaching toward the space occupied by the target source: the pointing condition. We tested three groups of participants (naming, pointing, and reaching groups) each while performing a sound localization task in normal and altered listening situations (i.e. mild-moderate unilateral hearing loss) simulated through auditory virtual reality technology. The experiment comprised four blocks: during the first and the last block, participants were tested in normal listening condition, while during the second and the third in altered listening condition. We measured their performance, their subjective judgments (e.g. effort), and their head-related behavior (through kinematic tracking). First, people's performance decreased when exposed to asymmetrical mild-moderate hearing impairment, more specifically on the ipsilateral side and for the pointing group. Second, we documented that all groups decreased their localization errors across altered listening blocks, but the extent of this reduction was higher for reaching and pointing as compared to the naming group. Crucially, the reaching group leads to a greater error reduction for the side where the listening alteration was applied. Furthermore, we documented that, across blocks, reaching and pointing groups increased the implementation of head motor behavior during the task (i.e., they increased approaching head movements toward the space of the sound) more than naming. Third, while performance in the unaltered blocks (first and last) was comparable, only the reaching group continued to exhibit a head behavior similar to those developed during the altered blocks (second and third), corroborating the previous observed relationship between the reaching to sounds task and head movements. In conclusion, this study further demonstrated the effectiveness of reaching to sounds as compared to pointing and naming in the learning processes. This effect could be related both to the process of implementing goal-directed motor actions and to the role of reaching actions in fostering the implementation of head-related motor strategies.
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.