Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38758512›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2025

Noisy speech impairs retention of previously heard information only at short time scales.

Violet A Brown, Katrina Sewell, Jed Villanueva, Julia F Strand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Violet A BrownDepartment of Psychology, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, USA. violetbrownpsych@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5310-6499
Katrina SewellDepartment of Psychology, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, USA.
Jed VillanuevaDepartment of Psychology, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, USA.
Julia F StrandDepartment of Psychology, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, USA.

Funding

Listening effort and audiovisual speech by L1 ("native") and LX ("nonnative") English speakersR15DC018114 · NIDCD · CARLETON COLLEGE · PI STRAND, JULIA F · 2019 to 2023
$841k
National Institutes of Health; NIDCD R15-DC018114National Institutes of Health; NIDCD R15-DC018114-02NIDCD NIH HHS R15 DC018114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When speech is presented in noise, listeners must recruit cognitive resources to resolve the mismatch between the noisy input and representations in memory. A consequence of this effortful listening is impaired memory for content presented earlier. In the first study on effortful listening, Rabbitt, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 241-248 (1968; Experiment 2) found that recall for a list of digits was poorer when subsequent digits were presented with masking noise than without. Experiment 3 of that study extended this effect to more naturalistic, passage-length materials. Although the findings of Rabbitt's Experiment 2 have been replicated multiple times, no work has assessed the robustness of Experiment 3. We conducted a replication attempt of Rabbitt's Experiment 3 at three signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Results at one of the SNRs (Experiment 1a of the current study) were in the opposite direction from what Rabbitt, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 241-248, (1968) reported - that is, speech was recalled more accurately when it was followed by speech presented in noise rather than in the clear - and results at the other two SNRs showed no effect of noise (Experiments 1b and 1c). In addition, reanalysis of a replication of Rabbitt's seminal finding in his second experiment showed that the effect of effortful listening on previously presented information is transient. Thus, effortful listening caused by noise appears to only impair memory for information presented immediately before the noise, which may account for our finding that noise in the second-half of a long passage did not impair recall of information presented in the first half of the passage.

Indexed as

Mental RecallNoisePerceptual MaskingRetention, PsychologySpeech PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultListening effortRecallReplicationSpeech

Identifiers

PMID38758512
PMCPMC11569267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.