ArticleScientific reports2024
Pupillometry reveals effects of pitch manipulation within and across words on listening effort and short-term memory.
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 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For individuals with hearing loss, even successful speech communication comes at a cost. Cochlear implants transmit degraded information, specifically for voice pitch, which demands extra and sustained listening effort. The current study hypothesized that abnormal pitch patterns contribute to the additional listening effort, even in non-tonal language native speaking normally hearing listeners. We manipulated the fundamental frequency (F0) within and across words, while participants listen and repeat (simple intelligibility task), or listen, repeat, and later recall (concurrent encoding task) the words. In both experiments, the F0 manipulations resulted in small changes in intelligibility but no difference in free recall or subjective effort ratings. Pupillary metrics were yet sensitive to these manipulations: pupil dilations were larger when words were monotonized (flat contour) or inverted (the natural contour flipped upside-down), and larger when successive words were organized into a melodic pattern. The most likely interpretation is that the natural or expected F0 contour of a word contributes to its identity and facilitate its matching and retrieval from the phonological representation stored in long-term memory. Consequently, degrading words' F0 contour can result in extra listening effort. Our results call for solutions to improve pitch saliency and naturalness in future development of cochlear implants' signal processing strategies, even for non-tonal languages.
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.