Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38406584›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024

Evaluating speech-in-speech perception via a humanoid robot.

Luke Meyer, Gloria Araiza-Illan, Laura Rachman, Etienne Gaudrain, Deniz Başkent

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Luke MeyerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Gloria Araiza-IllanDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Laura RachmanDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Etienne GaudrainLyon Neuroscience Research Center, CNRS UMR 5292, INSERM UMRS 1028, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Université de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Deniz BaşkentDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Underlying mechanisms of speech perception masked by background speakers, a common daily listening condition, are often investigated using various and lengthy psychophysical tests. The presence of a social agent, such as an interactive humanoid NAO robot, may help maintain engagement and attention. However, such robots potentially have limited sound quality or processing speed. Methods: As a first step toward the use of NAO in psychophysical testing of speech- in-speech perception, we compared normal-hearing young adults' performance when using the standard computer interface to that when using a NAO robot to introduce the test and present all corresponding stimuli. Target sentences were presented with colour and number keywords in the presence of competing masker speech at varying target-to-masker ratios. Sentences were produced by the same speaker, but voice differences between the target and masker were introduced using speech synthesis methods. To assess test performance, speech intelligibility and data collection duration were compared between the computer and NAO setups. Human-robot interaction was assessed using the Negative Attitude Toward Robot Scale (NARS) and quantification of behavioural cues (backchannels). Results: Speech intelligibility results showed functional similarity between the computer and NAO setups. Data collection durations were longer when using NAO. NARS results showed participants had a relatively positive attitude toward "situations of interactions" with robots prior to the experiment, but otherwise showed neutral attitudes toward the "social influence" of and "emotions in interaction" with robots. The presence of more positive backchannels when using NAO suggest higher engagement with the robot in comparison to the computer. Discussion: Overall, the study presents the potential of the NAO for presenting speech materials and collecting psychophysical measurements for speech-in-speech perception.

Indexed as

human robot interactionNAO robotpsychophysics testingspeech maskingspeech perception

Identifiers

PMID38406584
PMCPMC10884269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.