ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2024
Listening Effort for Speech in Noise Perception Using Pupil Dilation: A Comparison Among Percussionists, Non-Percussionists, and Non-Musicians.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 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.
- Physiological Measures of Reduced Listening Effort in Active Noise Canceling: Evidence From a Low-β Functional Network in an Event-Related Potential Study.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesMost studies in literature attribute the benefits of musical training on speech in noise (SIN) perception to "experience-based" plasticity, which assists in the activation of speech-processing networks. However, whether musicianship provides an advantage for the listening effort (LE) required to comprehend speech in degraded environments has received less attention. The current study aimed to understand the influence of Indian classical music training on SIN perception and its related LE across percussionists, non-percussionists, and non-musicians. SUBJECTS AND
methodsA quasi-experiment was conducted on 16 percussionists, 17 non-percussionists, and 26 non-musicians aged 18-35 years with normal hearing. In phase 1, musical abilities were assessed using Mini-Profile of Music Perception Skills (Mini-PROMS). Phase 2 examined SIN using Tamil Phonemically-Balanced Words and Tamil Matrix Sentence Test at +5 dB, 0 dB, and -5 dB SNR and LE using pupillometry, measuring pupil dilations with an eye-tracker.
resultsFractional Logit and Linear Regression models demonstrated that percussionists outperformed non-percussionists in Tuning and Speed subsets of Mini-PROMS. Percussionists outperformed non-percussionists and non-musicians in SIN and LE at -5 dB SNR for words and at 0 dB and -5 dB SNR for sentences.
conclusionsPercussionists have the greatest advantage in decoding SIN with reduced LE followed by non-percussionists and non-musicians, demonstrating musician-advantage in most challenging listening conditions.
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.