ArticleTrends in hearing
Is Recognition of Speech in Noise Related to Memory Disruption Caused by Irrelevant Sound?
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- When Everyday Sounds Become Barriers: The Effect of Misophonia on Speech Perception.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Listeners with normal audiometric thresholds show substantial variability in their ability to understand speech in noise (SiN). These individual differences have been reported to be associated with a range of auditory and cognitive abilities. The present study addresses the association between SiN processing and the individual susceptibility of short-term memory to auditory distraction (i.e., the irrelevant sound effect [ISE]). In a sample of 67 young adult participants with normal audiometric thresholds, we measured speech recognition performance in a spatial listening task with two interfering talkers (speech-in-speech identification), audiometric thresholds, binaural sensitivity to the temporal fine structure (interaural phase differences [IPD]), serial memory with and without interfering talkers, and self-reported noise sensitivity. Speech-in-speech processing was not significantly associated with the ISE. The most important predictors of high speech-in-speech recognition performance were a large short-term memory span, low IPD thresholds, bilaterally symmetrical audiometric thresholds, and low individual noise sensitivity. Surprisingly, the susceptibility of short-term memory to irrelevant sound accounted for a substantially smaller amount of variance in speech-in-speech processing than the nondisrupted short-term memory capacity. The data confirm the role of binaural sensitivity to the temporal fine structure, although its association to SiN recognition was weaker than in some previous studies. The inverse association between self-reported noise sensitivity and SiN processing deserves further investigation.
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.